Crookbond Posted September 6, 2014 Posted September 6, 2014 So' date= just because Nehru was the first Prime Minister, is he above criticism? I was not alive during the period in which Nehru was the Prime Minister and hence could not have possibly critiqued his policies in real time. So, are you saying that in hindsight, one cannot criticize any of the past policies? That would be a very bizarre and hypocritical argument on your part. And look who is talking about picking pitch-forks. The moment somebody mentions the word "Modi", you and some other posters pick up pitchforks, spears, swords, trishuls, bow and arrows, stones and what not. Or do you disagree and think that you are a perfectly reasonable person and do not "target" any individual? Please read and assimilate before taking the pains to type a response. It will lead to a better understanding of both positions and more constructive discussion. Lastly, Do NOT indulge in cherry picking. Here's what I said in my previous post By all means' date=' talk about the foreign policy failures during the Indo-Sino war[/quote'] This clearly says that I didn't for a second suggest that Nehru is above criticism like you say above. Next, when you criticize policies - you have to travel back in time put yourself in the same shoe and criticize. You have to "dumb down" (for lack of a better word) to understand the situation at that time. Let me put it this way - if people were to be asked what would drive them fastest in the 1910s via roads most people would've said "A really fast horse". However, it wasn't a horse that drives us fast - it is cars. Just because people were unable to foresee that there would be a new invention called car doesn't make their prediction stupid or vested with an agenda. It just makes them wrong but good for their time. You have missed a lot of points where I have praised Modi - cleaning Ganga, SRCC speech etc. (most recent one being Japan diplomacy). Even here, you equated Nehru having a day named after him to Modi having a day named after him which is completely out of line and bizarre because by rule of thumb (like I showed in my previous post) days/events tend to be named (in all organizations) after people who have high stakes during initiation periods. There are no vested interests or hidden agendas behind it but rather these people who enter the scene where there is a clean slate have high stake. For example - everyone remembers Zuckerberg as the Facebook billionaire but few people would know that he put in money from his own pocket to keep Facebook sustain for a long period of time. Of course, you will have Zuck-athons at Facebook. Is that a kaanspiracy - no it is NOT, that's the order of the world. Nehru was a freedom fighter and did very well with it. All it takes is a little bit of reading up and a little bit of grace to accept that no matter how much I don't like Nehru he had a vision for the country which was bloody good. Nehru's party screwed up the implementation once he was no longer on this earth, this doesn't mean the plan wasn't good. This doesn't mean he's beyond criticism but indulge in critique not criticism (there's a subtle difference between the two). For example, I am here to gladly accept Nehru's foibles during the Sino-Indian war. But this whole new Internet generation idea of Nehru/Congress = bad is not only unhealthy but completely arrogant.
gattaca Posted September 6, 2014 Posted September 6, 2014 Isn't Nehru ideology socialism than capitalism ? I feel this caused more issues to India.
Texan Posted September 6, 2014 Posted September 6, 2014 Please read and assimilate before taking the pains to type a response. It will lead to a better understanding of both positions and more constructive discussion. Lastly, Do NOT indulge in cherry picking. Here's what I said in my previous post This clearly says that I didn't for a second suggest that Nehru is above criticism like you say above. Next, when you criticize policies - you have to travel back in time put yourself in the same shoe and criticize. You have to "dumb down" (for lack of a better word) to understand the situation at that time. Let me put it this way - if people were to be asked what would drive them fastest in the 1910s via roads most people would've said "A really fast horse". However, it wasn't a horse that drives us fast - it is cars. Just because people were unable to foresee that there would be a new invention called car doesn't make their prediction stupid or vested with an agenda. It just makes them wrong but good for their time. You have missed a lot of points where I have praised Modi - cleaning Ganga, SRCC speech etc. (most recent one being Japan diplomacy). Even here, you equated Nehru having a day named after him to Modi having a day named after him which is completely out of line and bizarre because by rule of thumb (like I showed in my previous post) days/events tend to be named (in all organizations) after people who have high stakes during initiation periods. There are no vested interests or hidden agendas behind it but rather these people who enter the scene where there is a clean slate have high stake. For example - everyone remembers Zuckerberg as the Facebook billionaire but few people would know that he put in money from his own pocket to keep Facebook sustain for a long period of time. Of course, you will have Zuck-athons at Facebook. Is that a kaanspiracy - no it is NOT, that's the order of the world. Nehru was a freedom fighter and did very well with it. All it takes is a little bit of reading up and a little bit of grace to accept that no matter how much I don't like Nehru he had a vision for the country which was bloody good. Nehru's party screwed up the implementation once he was no longer on this earth, this doesn't mean the plan wasn't good. This doesn't mean he's beyond criticism but indulge in critique not criticism (there's a subtle difference between the two). For example, I am here to gladly accept Nehru's foibles during the Sino-Indian war. But this whole new Internet generation idea of Nehru/Congress = bad is not only unhealthy but completely arrogant. First of all you need to read my original post, process it, understand it and try to analyze it before you make your needless arguments. In comparing a day named after Nehru and saying how "haters would erupt if Modi named a day after him", in your world does that equate to "blindly grabbing a pitch-fork against Nehru"? Try to do something that you have preached in this post - put yourself in my position and determine if that qualifies as "blindly grabbing a pitch-fork". You seem to be excellent at preaching, but from what I have seen you rarely ever follow your own sermons. I will give you an example of what a case of "blindly coming out which pitch-forks is". You created a thread sometime ago about all the riots that happened in Gujarat in the last 10 years. When I asked you about riots that happened in other parts of the country, you said that you do not want to find out about them. So, in short you do not care if riots happened in other parts of the country during the same time period but only want to point out that riots happened in Gujarat while Modi was Chief Minister. Now, that is what is called as "blindly grabbing a pitch-fork". Thirdly, you believe that Nehru's vision for the country was good. But, you are unable to even entertain any counter argument, if there is one, on the topic. So, what you are saying is that everybody should blindly accept that your belief is true. On the contrary, there could be many that see that Modi's vision for the country is good too. But, you may not think alike and yet your thoughts are entertained. So, in essence, you want to only impose your thoughts on everybody else.
hhunaeh Posted September 7, 2014 Posted September 7, 2014 who is this nehru? What did he ever do for us? One more idiot who gives congress a legacy that bjp will never have. Best thing to do will be to tear him down and there by tear down congress. If you ask me, we should stop celebrating children's day on nehru's birthday and instead do it on hitler's birthday considering how important hitler and his work is for bjp. :haha:
Crookbond Posted September 7, 2014 Posted September 7, 2014 First of all you need to read my original post, process it, understand it and try to analyze it before you make your needless arguments. In comparing a day named after Nehru and saying how "haters would erupt if Modi named a day after him", in your world does that equate to "blindly grabbing a pitch-fork against Nehru"? Try to do something that you have preached in this post - put yourself in my position and determine if that qualifies as "blindly grabbing a pitch-fork". You can't compare Nehru getting a day named him and Modi getting a day named after him. That is an out of place comparison. The "pitch-fork" comment was a more general comment which I made for the discourse on Internet regarding Nehru/Congress these days - it wasn't for you in particular. You seem to be excellent at preaching, but from what I have seen you rarely ever follow your own sermons. I will give you an example of what a case of "blindly coming out which pitch-forks is". You created a thread sometime ago about all the riots that happened in Gujarat in the last 10 years. When I asked you about riots that happened in other parts of the country said that you do not want to find out about them., you So, in short you do not care if riots happened in other parts of the country during the same time period but only want to point out that riots happened in Gujarat while Modi was Chief Minister. Now, that is what is called as "blindly grabbing a pitch-fork". Here's why I didn't answer because you indulged in "Whataboutism". The thing was Modi/Jaitley were beating their chest that Gujarat was riot free since 2003. The other states - weren't. Now, since it was already an acceptable fact that the other states where not riot free - the question you raise is called a red herring. Some people tried to explain you in that thread and I let them but it seems you can't get that simple point. Thirdly, you believe that Nehru's vision for the country was good. But, you are unable to even entertain any counter argument, if there is one, on the topic. So, what you are saying is that everybody should blindly accept that your belief is true. On the contrary, there could be many that see that Modi's vision for the country is good too. But, you may not think alike and yet your thoughts are entertained. So, in essence, you want to only impose your thoughts on everybody else. Another reading comprehension failure. In the same post you quoted, I said that you should critique Nehru's vision. That's not remotely called "not entertaining a counter argument". I'm up for an argument and I gave an example (Sino-Indian war) earlier but you have conveniently ignored that argument. You know what's most funny? I feel that Modi's vision for the country is good too. I love the fact that obsolete laws are being reviewed, I love that there is FDI in railways (albeit a U-turn) etc. and I love 100 other things which Modi has done. Bu,t the binary moron mentality of the keyboard generation won't be able to digest that fact. Why? Because well, Nehru/Congress == Bad, Modi /BJP== Good. The manifestation of that attitude was in the original post where you compared Modi's "Teachers Day" address and Nehru's "Children Day". Now, rather than questioning what I'm preaching it will be better if you get the victim mentality out of your head and start discussing on how/why you think what is good and what isn't.
Texan Posted September 7, 2014 Posted September 7, 2014 You can't compare Nehru getting a day named him and Modi getting a day named after him. That is an out of place comparison. The "pitch-fork" comment was a more general comment which I made for the discourse on Internet regarding Nehru/Congress these days - it wasn't for you in particular. Here's why I didn't answer because you indulged in "Whataboutism". The thing was Modi/Jaitley were beating their chest that Gujarat was riot free since 2003. The other states - weren't. Now, since it was already an acceptable fact that the other states where not riot free - the question you raise is called a red herring. Some people tried to explain you in that thread and I let them but it seems you can't get that simple point. Another reading comprehension failure. In the same post you quoted, I said that you should critique Nehru's vision. That's not remotely called "not entertaining a counter argument". I'm up for an argument and I gave an example (Sino-Indian war) earlier but you have conveniently ignored that argument. You know what's most funny? I feel that Modi's vision for the country is good too. I love the fact that obsolete laws are being reviewed, I love that there is FDI in railways (albeit a U-turn) etc. and I love 100 other things which Modi has done. Bu,t the binary moron mentality of the keyboard generation won't be able to digest that fact. Why? Because well, Nehru/Congress == Bad, Modi /BJP== Good. The manifestation of that attitude was in the original post where you compared Modi's "Teachers Day" address and Nehru's "Children Day". Now, rather than questioning what I'm preaching it will be better if you get the victim mentality out of your head and start discussing on how/why you think what is good and what isn't. I have to commend your ability of beating around the bush. You seem to have perfected that art. By creating a thread that exclusively points out riots happeneing in one state while conveniently ommitting other states, you were trying to paint a picture as though only Gujarat suffered from riots, that too only when Modi was the CM. There is a Yiddish proverb that says, " A half truth is a whole lie" and you were found guilty of indulging in just that. You can debate all you want on this and you can go back and check that thread and many other posters also pointed that out to you, but your prejudiced brain cannot for one moment think from a neutral point of view. So, give it a rest and do not tax it too much. Also, the "keyboard generation" and "coffee table analyst" that you deride - let me point out to you that you are as much a part of that same generation and as much a "coffee table analyst" as everyone else on this forum. It is funny that you mentioned that Nehru/Congress = Bad is my attitude derived from a single line comparing Childrens' Day with how mad Modi haters would be if he named a day to be celebrated on his birthday. Is that all it takes to determine an attitude that something is always bad? If that is the case, then you have many posts on this forum that clearly displays your attitude that BJP/Modi == Terrible. But, I am sure you will debate that point too even though almost everyone who frequents this section of the forum on a fairly regular basis knows that.
Yoda-esque Posted September 7, 2014 Posted September 7, 2014 Take away Google and most posters here wouldn't seem very smart
Crookbond Posted September 7, 2014 Posted September 7, 2014 The best part about replying to you is that I just need to paste my previous comment. Here it goes. I have to commend your ability of beating around the bush. You seem to have perfected that art. By creating a thread that exclusively points out riots happeneing in one state while conveniently ommitting other states' date= you were trying to paint a picture as though only Gujarat suffered from riots, that too only when Modi was the CM. There is a Yiddish proverb that says, " A half truth is a whole lie" and you were found guilty of indulging in just that. You can debate all you want on this and you can go back and check that thread and many other posters also pointed that out to you, but your prejudiced brain cannot for one moment think from a neutral point of view. So, give it a rest and do not tax it too much. The thing was Modi/Jaitley were beating their chest that Gujarat was riot free since 2003. The other states - weren't. Now, since it was already an acceptable fact that the other states where not riot free - the question you raise is called a red herring. Some people tried to explain you in that thread and I let them but it seems you can't get that simple point. Also, the "keyboard generation" and "coffee table analyst" that you deride - let me point out to you that you are as much a part of that same generation and as much a "coffee table analyst" as everyone else on this forum. Yes, I am. It is funny that you mentioned that Nehru/Congress = Bad is my attitude derived from a single line comparing Childrens' Day with how mad Modi haters would be if he named a day to be celebrated on his birthday. Is that all it takes to determine an attitude that something is always bad? If that is the case, then you have many posts on this forum that clearly displays your attitude that BJP/Modi == Terrible. But, I am sure you will debate that point too even though almost everyone who frequents this section of the forum on a fairly regular basis knows that. You can't compare Nehru getting a day named him and Modi getting a day named after him. That is an out of place comparison.
Crookbond Posted September 7, 2014 Posted September 7, 2014 Take away Google and most posters here wouldn't seem very smart Take away hands and people would find it difficult to eat Take away legs and people would find it difficult to walk Meanwhile, the "take aways" from your posts are big zero. No contribution, just plain meaningless one line platitudes. Someone like Texan is far more better than people like you - at least he puts in some effort to have a discussion.
Sachin=GOD Posted September 7, 2014 Posted September 7, 2014 Take away Google and most posters here wouldn't seem very smart Isn't that true of a very, very large number of people outside of ICF too these days? Also, it isn't necessarily the worst thing since they are ultimately learning something.
FischerTal Posted September 7, 2014 Posted September 7, 2014 Take away hands and people would find it difficult to eat Take away legs and people would find it difficult to walk Meanwhile, the "take aways" from your posts are big zero. No contribution, just plain meaningless one line platitudes. Someone like Texan is far more better than people like you - at least he puts in some effort to have a discussion. True
veer Posted September 8, 2014 Posted September 8, 2014 Just saw the entire interaction between Students and the PM.. What an initiative....!! He is really making his position count.. positive attidue, right direction... 'The boss...' in true sense. Keeps on surprising people like me..
Sachin=GOD Posted September 8, 2014 Posted September 8, 2014 Showmanship trumps substance during Modi visit BY JEFF KINGSTON Prime Minister Narendra Modi is re-energizing Indian diplomacy and trying to carve out a more dynamic role for his country in global affairs. He has just wrapped up a visit to Kyoto and Tokyo, playing the role of pitchman-in-chief and holding a summit with Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Overall, the Japanese media’s coverage of Modi’s visit was oddly muted despite all the fanfare. This comes in contrast to the extensive coverage Modi’s visit received in the Indian media. Arriving in Kyoto on Aug. 30, Modi got the personal touch from Abe, who made the trek to Kansai to roll out the red carpet for an Asian leader who shares many of his convictions. This gesture came at a busy time for the Japanese prime minister as he prepared to reshuffle his Cabinet, and tried to fend off criticism over his praise of war criminals and lackluster response to a fatal mudslide in Hiroshima. Guiding Modi around some of Kyoto’s famous temples and hosting a welcome banquet certainly underscored how much importance Abe attached to the Indian leader’s visit. The trip also marked Modi’s diplomatic debut on the international stage. An Indian journalist told me that Modi received a very warm reception from the overseas Indian community, one that tends to share his right-wing and patriotic outlook. This journalist also said Modi was more relaxed than usual, showing off his crowd-pleasing skills and shedding the more combative demeanor he displays at home where he is a more polarizing figure. The optics may have been the highlight as both leaders have crack PR teams and know the importance of good photo opportunities, starting with a welcome bear hug, temple tours and a tea ceremony, and Modi showing off his drumming and chopstick skills. Both leaders bonded just the way their handlers choreographed them to, projecting as much friendliness as they could muster. Modi also met with the Emperor and told him he would improve Japanese language instruction in India to help promote closer ties. But on Japan’s evening news that night, this historic encounter merited barely a minute of coverage and was totally overshadowed by speculation about the Cabinet reshuffle, a Japanese tennis player reaching the quarterfinals at the U.S. Open, lifting of the Hiroshima evacuation order and, longest of all, the surging sales of beer targeting guys with gout. So why was this much-touted summit an inconclusive washout? Modi and Abe had a lot to talk about: stalled negotiations on a civilian nuclear deal, arms sales, dealing with China, nurturing a strategic relationship, massive infrastructure projects and promoting trade and investment. But at the end of the day not much happened. The two sides were unable to overcome the impasse over the civilian nuclear energy deal that has been pending for four long years because Japan wants to retain the right to suspend its participation if India conducts nuclear weapons tests and is also reluctant to grant India the right to reprocess spent fuel, even though it agreed to allow Turkey to do so in a deal concluded last year. India perhaps imagined that Japan would cave in because it offers a potential $85 billion market for new reactors, underestimating just how sensitive the nuclear weapons issue is in Japan. Moreover, Japanese nuclear exporters (Toshiba, Hitachi and Mitsubishi) are allergic to India’s stance on nuclear liability. So the civilian nuclear deal will remain on the leaders’ “to do†list. More surprising from Tokyo’s perspective was Modi’s reluctance to upgrade regular talks on foreign policy and security affairs to the Cabinet level — the two-plus-two model of talks between foreign and defense ministers, a framework Japan has adopted in talks with the United States and Australia. The Asahi Shimbun speculated that Modi shied from the upgrade due to concerns over angering China, but it seems more likely that India is withholding the two-plus-two deal as a bargaining chip in the broader negotiations. India isn’t eager to be a strategic counterweight to China in cahoots with Tokyo and Washington. Moreover, Modi and Abe both won elections promising economic revival. These leaders of the second- and third-largest economies in Asia are eager to tap China’s enormous market potential despite concerns over Beijing’s hegemonic ambitions. China after all is the largest trading partner of both nations. So what was accomplished? Not much beyond some boilerplate pledges that fell far short of commitments. They called for doubling Japanese foreign direct investment (FDI) and the number of Japanese firms operating in India over the next five years. Currently, India accounts for only 1.2 percent of Japanese FDI. The two sides also reaffirmed the importance of strengthening strategic ties and called for the continuation of joint naval exercises. There was also more talk about selling the Japanese manufactured US-2 amphibian aircraft, now possible because Abe lifted Japan’s arms export ban. Abe is also eager to sell India the same submarines that Australia intends to purchase. The biggest lure, however, may well be the urgent need to upgrade India’s dire infrastructure, representing a huge potential market for long-distance shinkansen technology and mass-transit projects in some 30 cities. In order to promote such projects, Abe announced Japan’s intention of providing public and private financing and investments totaling nearly $34 billion over the next five years. Can he deliver? Following his debut in Japan, Modi returned home to greet Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott and later this month will host a visit by Chinese President Xi Jinping before visiting U.S. President Barack Obama in Washington. For his part, Abe is off on Sept. 6 for visits to Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, where he plans to offer support for social infrastructure projects to counter China’s growing influence. For this round, Abe and Modi nurtured their personal relationship and the summitry generated momentum toward enhanced cooperation. But tapping the potential for enhanced security cooperation and business ties will require painstaking negotiations to bridge differences. India is pursuing a hedging strategy vis-a-vis China and that places constraints on what will develop with Tokyo. Moreover, as one Tokyo-based manager of regional real-estate investments told me, he and many other businessmen have zero interest in investing in India because partners there are far less reliable than in China and corruption is far more extortionate. So Modi may be right that India offers democracy, human resources and a growing market, but that may not be enough to entice foreign participation in the “Rising India†narrative. Kitakyushu-based washlet firm Toto, however, must be upbeat about market prospects. In his Independence Day speech last month, Modi lamented that half of India’s 1.2 billion people lack toilet access and promised to address this basic need. Jeff Kingston is the director of Asian Studies, Temple University Japan. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2014/09/06/commentary/showmanship-trumps-substance-modi-visit/#.VAwFtevTrmd.gmail In India it did seem that the visit was a huge success.
FischerTal Posted September 8, 2014 Posted September 8, 2014 Narendra Modi government working for strong regulator for coal sector Source: http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-narendra-modi-government-working-for-strong-regulator-for-coal-sector-2016941
Detonator Posted September 8, 2014 Posted September 8, 2014 I don't get this anti-Nehru stance. Today's congress is Indra Congress, not the one Nehru lead. Nehru's party was filled with freedom fighters, and the problem started they were thrown out by Indra during her reign, replaced them with crooks. However that newly born crooked party carried over the name tag that "the party which got us independence", which is still being used. Nehru's socio-economic policies were practical when we are a poor uneducated country but the again the problem is not with his policies itself but hogging to those expired policies to this date. Nehru's biggest mistake was bringing Indra into the party, which became dynasty. And comparing Modi with Nehru is totally insane and too early.
Yoda-esque Posted September 8, 2014 Posted September 8, 2014 I don't get this anti-Nehru stance. Today's congress is Indra Congress, not the one Nehru lead. Nehru's party was filled with freedom fighters, and the problem started they were thrown out by Indra during her reign, replaced them with crooks. However that newly born crooked party carried over the name tag that "the party which got us independence", which is still being used. Nehru's socio-economic policies were practical when we are a poor uneducated country but the again the problem is not with his policies itself but hogging to those expired policies to this date. Nehru's biggest mistake was bringing Indra into the party, which became dynasty. And comparing Modi with Nehru is totally insane and too early. Who is anti nehru?
Detonator Posted September 8, 2014 Posted September 8, 2014 Who is anti nehru? recent discussions :dontknow: was my post irrelavant :ohmy: :((
Crookbond Posted September 8, 2014 Posted September 8, 2014 I don't get this anti-Nehru stance. Today's congress is Indra Congress, not the one Nehru lead. Nehru's party was filled with freedom fighters, and the problem started they were thrown out by Indra during her reign, replaced them with crooks. However that newly born crooked party carried over the name tag that "the party which got us independence", which is still being used. Nehru's socio-economic policies were practical when we are a poor uneducated country but the again the problem is not with his policies itself but hogging to those expired policies to this date. Nehru's biggest mistake was bringing Indra into the party, which became dynasty. And comparing Modi with Nehru is totally insane and too early. Rekt! Congress ® was the name. In 1971, Election Commission allowed it to have the name of Indian National Congress after they won an overwhelming majority IIRC.
Sachin=GOD Posted September 8, 2014 Posted September 8, 2014 Rekt! Congress ® was the name. In 1971' date=' Election Commission allowed it to have the name of Indian National Congress after they won an overwhelming majority IIRC.[/quote'] There was a further division in 1978 when Indira Gandhi formed a new party with her followers - Congress (I) with I standing for Indira. The new party won the 1980 elections and then in 1981 the EC recognized it as the real Indian National Congress. So today's Congress is most certainly not the party which was led by Jawaharlal Nehru.
Recommended Posts