India must help pakistan : Shashi Tharoor ( The geography of hope )

[Nitin Goyal]

Maybe you should search up N11 Countries? Oh, wait nevermind, it won't let you sleep at night.

don't you get a hand on Failed country list

 

[yyetttt]

Did you notice that I repeated two or three times that I wasn't talking about economy alone? Oh and do you know why there was an artificial economic growth during Musharaff's tenure? Hint: The money pumped in after 9/11, which did not improve people's lives, but counted as GDP growth. In any case, if you want to persist in your belief that all your problems are because of Zardari, fine, may your beliefs make you happy. I was trying to take your thinking to a slightly higher than superficial level. Hopefully the future architects of your country will be able to think deeper than that.

Aid is only .04% of Pakistan's GDP. You're acting like we will resort to eating grass if America isn't there lol.

---------- Post added at 02:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:18 PM ----------

don't you get a hand on Failed country list

Shouldn't you worry about your 320 million poor??

 

[seethru]

Democracy is not a free license to liars, traitors and spineless corrupt losers that they can go about doing anything and everything. There is a limit and that limit must be maintained.

Democracy is very much that. everyone has a stake , everyone has power , everyone has say.

Fundamental assumption is that , at any given time, the number of sane, rational,thinking,responsible people in a society out number the insane, moron, suicidal, selfish and irresponsible people., If the society is outnumbered by idiots, then it simply isn't sustainable and would have to resort to division or civil war or some kind of political change which may not be as accountable as democracy.

And that is the reason why our country is filled with terrorist-lovers, traitors, cheaters and anti-national losers that are now using the same democracy that gave them these rights, to talk rubbish and hurl insults on the motherland that has covered their ungrateful backs.

Sorry but some punishments have existed in the past for a reason. Doing a suicidal act like Swedish politics in India would mean a threat to our nation's fabric.

Why freedom of speech when you can't say offensive, inflammatory and rather unpleasant things about people or communities.
we need freedom of speech precisely because we as human beings feel the urge to say things that some people or communities find offensive from time to time.

In short, Your views are so Un-Indian that they made me doubt about your nationality. Are you really Indian? or impersonator?

 

[janon]

^^
Yes, some people find this hard to believe - freedom of speech is the freedom to say unpleasant things. If it was the freedom to say things that nobody minds hearing, then it wouldn't have to be guaranteed as a fundamental right. I am proud to say that India, like most modern democracies, guarantees this freedom. And that is why I said that if he doesn't like it, he can move to China - where his views will be better appreciated. There you have the freedom to say whatever the government allows you to say - which is not freedom at all.

Tshering, I do not mean that as a personal insult. You just don't understand the concept of freedom of speech, and why it is important. And its not just you, many people don't. But luckily the people who formulated our laws knew it. And I should also reiterate that the article in question doesn't come anywhere close to being a bannable offense. Indians have the freedom to say much more unpleasant and inflammatory things than that, and that is how it should be. Neither you nor the government gets to decide what is acceptable to say, and nobody gets to exile citizens from the country for holding a different opinion. Thats why it is a free country. And will remain so, whether you like it or not. People will say things you don't like to hear - deal with it, and deal with the fact that you can't exile them for that. What you can do about it is to point out why they are wrong (if you can), and let the listeners decide who is right. Thats how free expression eventually leads to a stronger society.

Also, to be pedantic, I should mention that this is not a question of democracy, it is a question of personal freedom. There are democracies which don't allow freedom of speech. Democracy only implies how the government is formed.

 

[seethru]

^^
Yes, some people find this hard to believe - freedom of speech is the freedom to say unpleasant things. If it was the freedom to say things that nobody minds hearing, then it wouldn't have to be guaranteed as a fundamental right. I am proud to say that India, like most modern democracies, guarantees this freedom. And that is why I said that if he doesn't like it, he can move to China - where his views will be better appreciated. There you have the freedom to say whatever the government allows you to say - which is not freedom at all.

Tshering, I do not mean that as a personal insult. You just don't understand the concept of freedom of speech, and why it is important. And its not just you, many people don't. But luckily the people who formulated our laws knew it. And I should also reiterate that the article in question doesn't come anywhere close to being a bannable offense. Indians have the freedom to say much more unpleasant and inflammatory things than that, and that is how it should be. Neither you nor the government gets to decide what is acceptable to say, and nobody gets to exile people from the country if they are citizens. Thats why it is a free country. And will remain so, whether you like it or not. People will say things you don't like to hear - deal with it, and deal with the fact that you can't exile them for that.

Also, to be pedantic, I should mention that this is not a question of democracy, it is a question of personal freedom. There are democracies which don't allow freedom of speech. Democracy only implies how the government is formed.

but, we must admit, India has a bad record of banning movies, books on the basis that they may cause communal tensions. We`should get rid of that non sense and move towards true freedom. Absolute Economical, social and intellectual freedom.

 

[janon]

but, we must admit, India has a bad record of banning movies, books on the basis that they may cause communal tensions. We`should get rid of that non sense and move towards true freedom. Absolute Economical, social and intellectual freedom.

Completely agree. We need more freedom of speech and expression, not less.

To be honest India doesn't have as much freedom of expression as many european countries or the USA has, and THAT is my beef about India - that it needs to have more freedom. We should stop this habit of banning books or movies for "hurting religious sentiments" or such frivolous pretences. If somebody watches a film and goes about causing communal riots, he should be arrested for that - that should be a crime, not the movie. People have to be treated as adults, and adults should not be expected to go about causing riots because they watched a film or read a book. If your sentiments are hurt, go home and cry - don't make it an excuse to physically harm others around you.

 

[Killswitch]

Pakistan has allot of work to do in order to stop living off of charity.

 

[Shaurya]

but, we must admit, India has a bad record of banning movies, books on the basis that they may cause communal tensions. We`should get rid of that non sense and move towards true freedom. Absolute Economical, social and intellectual freedom.

It oly happens when muslims are offended... so ur statement is partially correct

 

[Shaurya]

Completely agree. We need more freedom of speech and expression, not less.

To be honest India doesn't have as much freedom of expression as many european countries or the USA has, and THAT is my beef about India - that it needs to have more freedom. We should stop this habit of banning books or movies for "hurting religious sentiments" or such frivolous pretences. If somebody watches a film and goes about causing communal riots, he should be arrested for that - that should be a crime, not the movie. People have to be treated as adults, and adults should not be expected to go about causing riots because they watched a film or read a book. If your sentiments are hurt, go home and cry - don't make it an excuse to physically harm others around you.

The question is- does India need that much freedom? there is a thin line between freedom and madness. although I respect your opinion but I dont think India could and should sustain that much freedom. I can easily see that your thoughts are good, in reality they wont be.. once you give total freedom you cannot argue about wrong and right.. sometimes the arguments gets really funny. I would rather see my country disciplined and less "free" than being turned into a hippie land

 

[janon]

It oly happens when muslims are offended... so ur statement is partially correct

No. It has happened when christians were offended. The Da Vinci code film and book was banned in many parts of India because Christians claimed to be offended. Books on Sivaji have been banned. The Bhavsagar granth was banned because certain sections of the Sikh community objected. The film "Fire" was banned due to pressure from hindu activists. I can cite n number of examples where the objections were not due to religious communities also. So your statement is, to put it mildly, untrue.

 

[Developereo]

And who exactly are YOU ?.... Mr. Internet tough guy, to make such an accusation ?

Shashi tharoor is one the best diplomats out there.

Tharoor's statements are always and entirely predictable.

Never mind Pakistan, just worry about helping yourselves first. India can use all the 'help' Indians can muster.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

^^
Yes, some people find this hard to believe - freedom of speech is the freedom to say unpleasant things. If it was the freedom to say things that nobody minds hearing, then it wouldn't have to be guaranteed as a fundamental right. I am proud to say that India, like most modern democracies, guarantees this freedom. And that is why I said that if he doesn't like it, he can move to China - where his views will be better appreciated. There you have the freedom to say whatever the government allows you to say - which is not freedom at all.

Tshering, I do not mean that as a personal insult. You just don't understand the concept of freedom of speech, and why it is important. And its not just you, many people don't. But luckily the people who formulated our laws knew it. And I should also reiterate that the article in question doesn't come anywhere close to being a bannable offense. Indians have the freedom to say much more unpleasant and inflammatory things than that, and that is how it should be. Neither you nor the government gets to decide what is acceptable to say, and nobody gets to exile citizens from the country for holding a different opinion. Thats why it is a free country. And will remain so, whether you like it or not. People will say things you don't like to hear - deal with it, and deal with the fact that you can't exile them for that. What you can do about it is to point out why they are wrong (if you can), and let the listeners decide who is right. Thats how free expression eventually leads to a stronger society.

Also, to be pedantic, I should mention that this is not a question of democracy, it is a question of personal freedom. There are democracies which don't allow freedom of speech. Democracy only implies how the government is formed.

Don't drag China into this. You have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[janon]

The question is- does India need that much freedom? there is a thin line between freedom and madness. although I respect your opinion but I dont think India could and should sustain that much freedom.

That is a very patronising attitude. Indians deserve and can handle as much freedom as anyone else. You cannot say that Indians are incapable of having as much freedom as europeans or whites or westerners. It is a post colonial hangover or some sort of cultural inferiority complex to suggest that.

once you give total freedom you cannot argue about wrong and right

Actually, it is only when we have freedom of speech that we can argue about wrong and right. Arguments cannot take place if one side is prevented from expressing its views. It is for that very reason, to come to enlightened conclusions about right and wrong, that everyone with an opinion should be allowed to say it.

Also, what do you mean by "giving total freedom"? Who exactly "gives"? Do you think freedom is a commodity held by the government to distribute to people in its magnanimity? Freedom can only be taken away. If it is not taken away, it exists. Government or society is not a god who sits and "gives" freedom when it chooses. We are all born with that freedom.

The countries that have freedom of expression have only become freer and stronger for it - they have not degenerated into hippilands, or broken up into pieces because of freedom of speech. If you think the government is a wise being who knows what is good for the people than they themselves do, and should be a big caring parent to all the people, you are dangerously mistaken.

 

[janon]

Don't drag China into this. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Maybe you could explain what it is, then? After all, the topic is freedom of speech. Oh wait, you won't have much to say on that.

Anyway...my point was not to flaim the chinese members. I was making a factual claim that we have the freedom to write this, and cannot be punished or exiled, as somebody suggested. China was just the first example that came to mind to compare. If you think I am mistaken, and Chinese people have guaranteed freedom of speech, be my guest and enlighten me. I have heard otherwise.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Maybe you could explain what it is, then? After all, the topic is freedom of speech. Oh wait, you won't have much to say on that.

Anyway...my point was not to flaim the chinese members. I was making a factual claim that we have the freedom to write this, and cannot be punished or exiled, as somebody suggested. China was just the first example that came to mind to compare. If you think I am mistaken, and Chinese people have guaranteed freedom of speech, be my guest and enlighten me. I have heard otherwise.

Well, are we allowed to say things like this? From a Chinese member in the mainland:

I think that Wen Jiabao is the 2nd worst China premier, and Li Peng is the 1st worst China premier, and Hu Jintao is the worst China president!
Fu*k house prices, fu*k Wen Jiabao, fu*k Hu Jintao!

I'm not saying China has great freedom of speech, that is one area that we can work on in the future. But it is usually exaggerated to ridiculous levels, whereas the truth is that we can pretty much say whatever we want as long as we are not forming a large-scale political movement to topple the government.