India’s Future in the World - Outstanding discussing between two intellectual giants of our time

[Kdpreddy]

i am fine with dictatorships if we can agree on who the dictator is

I don't like dictators mate.
They offer nothing but shit sandwiches and want us to pretend that it is a Paneer Sandwich.

Anyway, I was just taking a piss at how here the common view of 'one man's terrorist is.....' and extend it to dictators as well

 

[wiseone2]

I don't like dictators mate.
They offer nothing but shit sandwiches and want us to pretend that it is a Paneer Sandwich.

Anyway, I was just taking a piss at how here the common view of 'one man's terrorist is.....' and extend it to dictators as well

some pakistanis will clamor for army rule. yet they won't give a name of dictator from the past they can support

 

[Joe Shearer]

And "it" keeps going KABOOM.

Ok, let's play your silly kindy game of insulting each other.
Care to explain the below quote from you?

What was wrong with that? Gurumurthy has made so many dreadful mistakes in his three-part interview. Have you even sat through the three parts?

Tragic that you who pretend to be champion of free speech, a light bringer to ideas, a path breaker to utopia, in YOUR FIRST POST on topic spew such hatred, derision and venom.

It's not about whether anyone understood Gurumurthy. There is saner debate happening which you conveniently don't WANT to participate. You only want to discuss people by your choicest abuses masquerading with words - ENOUGH

Now either discuss the topic or Foff.

With whom? With those who haven't done their own homework? Have YOU heard them, btw? Can YOU summarise his points? I will not even ask you to point out his mistakes; just his points.

If you keep up with this silly kid stuff (really man, how old are you?) of insulting people at drop of hat, you will get nothing derision.

LOL.

And you think your derision is a factor? Are you serious?

 

[Kdpreddy]

What was wrong with that? Gurumurthy has made so many dreadful mistakes in his three-part interview. Have you even sat through the three parts?

Then quote those parts and let's start the discussion.
BUT that's not what you did.
I am not going to explain what you did in your post, since you clearly have the capacity to know EXACTLY what you did.

With whom? With those who haven't done their own homework? Have YOU heard them, btw? Can YOU summarise his points? I will not even ask you to point out his mistakes; just his points.

I am not playing your games.

You, clearly are not interested in discussing the content.

YOU are only interested in discussing people. Stop the pretence. Look at your this quote mate. You offer nothing to the debate except trying to put down the people trying to have one.

LOL.

And you think your derision is a factor? Are you serious?

It's one way to deal with bullies. Actually, it's the best way to deal with bullies.
You are a pompous bully and you will get with derision.

AND YES....MY DERISION IS A FACTOR - else, you won't be having this discussion with me.
It bothers you that I am doing the same to you what you keep doing to others.

 

[sankranti]

Then quote those parts and let's start the discussion.
BUT that's not what you did.
I am not going to explain what you did in your post, since you clearly have the capacity to know EXACTLY what you did.

I am not playing your games.

You, clearly are not interested in discussing the content.

YOU are only interested in discussing people. Stop the pretence. Look at your this quote mate. You offer nothing to the debate except trying to put down the people trying to have one.

It's one way to deal with bullies. Actually, it's the best way to deal with bullies.
You are a pompous bully and you will get with derision.

AND YES....MY DERISION IS A FACTOR - else, you won't be having this discussion with me.
It bothers you that I am doing the same to you what you keep doing to others.

Everything to the point.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Then quote those parts and let's start the discussion.
BUT that's not what you did.
I am not going to explain what you did in your post, since you clearly have the capacity to know EXACTLY what you did.

Certainly, once I know that the person(s) I am talking to have listened to these.

I am not playing your games.

You, clearly are not interested in discussing the content.

YOU are only interested in discussing people. Stop the pretence. Look at your this quote mate. You offer nothing to the debate except trying to put down the people trying to have one.

Don't play; don't prove that you know the content. Don't subject yourself to any test.

Where is the debate? Look at it from the beginning; there is no debate, because none of you have had the slightest thing to do with the contents of the presentation. What debate can there be on airy-fairy nothings?

It's one way to deal with bullies. Actually, it's the best way to deal with bullies.
You are a pompous bully and you will get with derision.

AND YES....MY DERISION IS A FACTOR - else, you won't be having this discussion with me.
It bothers you that I am doing the same to you what you keep doing to others.

Not really. I couldn't care less. And the discussion is because your friend has made himself scarce. As far as I am concerned, I have been attending to three other discussions, and these exchanges are a fraction of my engagement of time.

Please don't be disappointed but someone like you doesn't really have any impact on this exchange, something that cannot be called a discussion. So go on deriding. Not anyone's problem but yours.

 

[Kdpreddy]

Certainly, once I know that the person(s) I am talking to have listened to these.

huh...moot point. Below is your opening quote in this thread. You were trolling. As per rules, you should be banned but being part of the forum establishment must be great for people like you.

Two charlatans with the highest reputations among the disreputable. The journalist is also a trained and qualified chartered accountant, however.

Don't play; don't prove that you know the content. Don't subject yourself to any test.

Touché.

Where is the debate? Look at it from the beginning; there is no debate

No Shit Sherlock.
You climbed the dinner table and took a dump in the main course...You made sure there can be no debate by your silly school boy attacks.

because none of you have had the slightest thing to do with the contents of the presentation. What debate can there be on airy-fairy nothings?

Oh dear...Here "it" goes KABOOM again.
Just get the fuckDown from the imaginary perch you seem to have placed yourself on.

Not really. I couldn't care less. And the discussion is because your friend has made himself scarce. As far as I am concerned, I have been attending to three other discussions, and these exchanges are a fraction of my engagement of time.

Bullying does not constitute as discussion.
You have been caught spewing your BS, all this from you now is to cover the smell since I called you out.
A verbose shit flinging monkey is just that - A SHIT FLINGING MONKEY.

Please don't be disappointed but someone like you doesn't really have any impact on this exchange, something that cannot be called a discussion. So go on deriding. Not anyone's problem but yours.

Seriously mate, stop blowing your own imaginary trumpet.

 

[AndrewJin]

Have they talked about how they will do better than North Korean in global hunger index?

 

[prashantazazel]

So I watched the first video. The other two, maybe some other day.

The guest is mistaken in his analysis. Culture is considered important in Indian society (in all Asian societies in general ). That much is correct.
But this culture tends to drag us down on the development front.
Deleterious aspects of Indian culture:-

1. Overwhelming respect to elders -even when they are wrong. Economically, this hurts us because a lot of talent gets underutilised in conforming with the family aspirations.

2. Paying heed to the social customs, which are universally accepted as backward -like the caste system which hinders the growth of a major chunk of the population , not letting girls study as much as the guys, not allowing girls to pursue professional excellence, arranged marriages between uninterested couples (reduces professional and personal drive).

3. Trying to earn money the easy way instead of through hard work and innovation - this leads to corruption, nepotism and bribery.

4. Almost no interest in improving lives of others- jealousy and back biting is common here. Everyone feels entitled to take as much as possible, without giving back much to the society. Eg- people will park on the streets, litter the streets, destroy public property without a regard towards the impact on others.

5. Extreme apathy by the government servants - most Indians join government services to get rich via bribery. The standard of work is extremely low (in the government ). People are unwilling to do quality work, they would rather pocket the money.

The one positive I see these days is that youngsters are rapidly discarding these aspects of our culture.
I will elaborate the positives in another post.

 

[sankranti]

So I watched the first video. The other two, maybe some other day.

The guest is mistaken in his analysis. Culture is considered important in Indian society (in all Asian societies in general ). That much is correct.
But this culture tends to drag us down on the development front.
Deleterious aspects of Indian culture:-

"culture" by its every definition is a manifestation of collective human intellectual achievement.

So factually speaking, no collective intellectual achievement can drag down human development. This is a logical fallacy.

History is evidence to this undeniable fact. Humans have conquered every opposing force by collective intellectual achievement.

1. Overwhelming respect to elders -even when they are wrong. Economically, this hurts us because a lot of talent gets underutilised in conforming with the family aspirations.

This very thread itself demonstrates proof that there is no respect to elders when they are wrong. YOu just have to watch how old man joe has been reduced to irrelevance when he attempts to scuttle any discussion.

Family aspirations can burden the individual, but it can also act like an immense bank of support and inspiration to individual talent too. IF this was not true, the concept of family would have ended a very very long time ago.

Facts show that most culture has evolved into expanding the concept of human family to the whole world. a.k.a Vasudeva kutumbakam.

What you are referring too is exceptions , rather than the rule and those will always exist.

2. Paying heed to the social customs, which are universally accepted as backward -like the caste system which hinders the growth of a major chunk of the population , not letting girls study as much as the guys, not allowing girls to pursue professional excellence, arranged marriages between uninterested couples (reduces professional and personal drive).

Social customs are manifestations of the political and economic realities around us. Social customs are part of culture.

So if in the past, the environment was not conducive to Meritocracy, then social customs that favour caste arise. Same is true for girl education , child marriage etc.

A change in Social environment, automatically brings around a change in social customs as can be witnessed by the changes we see around us. A cultural evolution.

3. Trying to earn money the easy way instead of through hard work and innovation - this leads to corruption, nepotism and bribery.

This is just human nature. Everybody wants to take the easy path and many do when they see the Laws (or its implementation) or social norms encourage short cuts.

4. Almost no interest in improving lives of others- jealousy and back biting is common here. Everyone feels entitled to take as much as possible, without giving back much to the society. Eg- people will park on the streets, litter the streets, destroy public property without a regard towards the impact on others.

Again this is set in the backdrop of non implementation of the Laws which encourage short cuts as defined earlier (by you). The culture that arise from this political reality, discourage social concern and promotes individualism.

5. Extreme apathy by the government servants - most Indians join government services to get rich via bribery. The standard of work is extremely low (in the government ). People are unwilling to do quality work, they would rather pocket the money.

The one positive I see these days is that youngsters are rapidly discarding these aspects of our culture.
I will elaborate the positives in another post.

True again, and this is also the end result of non implementation of the Laws and a reflection of the political reality of the day.

Aptly explained by the ancient saying "yatha raja tatha praja ".


In conclusion Though I agree with your contention about the various shortfalls that have crept into our social culture, this is a temporary state that is a result of bad governance. This does not replace our DEEP culture which is a product of almost 10,000 years of civilizational values. This underlying deep culture is what is being discussed by the panelists.

 

[sankranti]

Actually, the paradigm is easy to understand, when it is laid out neatly. I have already done so, but you chose to ignore it, for one of the two reasons for which a thing is normally ignored: not for not being worth a reply, but for being too difficult to reply.

Nope, I do not dignify Ad hominems with a response. My contemptuous silence is the best reply.

There is no doubt that the only reason for this sustained revisionist campaign, of which you are one of the front-line soldiers*, is to restore the dominating position of the Brahmin wherever possible, and to eliminate those social and populating structures where Brahmin domination is impossible, such as Muslim society, or Sikh society, or Christian society; for that matter, Santhal society or north-east tribal society.

Yea, conspiracy theories and tin foil caps are common for losers secretly questioning their self worth and those who desire for control and security.

Racist conspiracy theories just take things one step further towards drinking the kool aid.

If you had really listened to Gurumurthy, you would have heard him, in the first video, construct a model of modern-day western society and economics built on half-understood and half-digested bits from Adam Smith, from Max Weber, from very badly misunderstood bits of Karl Marx, and finally from the utilitarianism of Bentham, whom he doesn't mention at all. He did get right that capitalism and communism both belong to western philosophy, but he did not get right the connection between western economical theory and western political theory or western philosophy.

Finally more accusations in a non related thread. More Ad Hominem attacks on the speaker, rather than discuss the content of his speech.

First PROVE that he misunderstood karl max, PROVE that he "half understood" Adam smith, PROVE any of your claims with evidence.

There were wild leaps and bounds between Weber's Capitalism and the Protestant Work Ethic, that showed a causality between elements of Protestant doctrine and the rise of capitalism, and the Divine Right of Kings, something from the field of politics, something that he horribly mangles, with not even a faint understanding of the status of a King under this doctrine. He drops clangers such as claiming that Kings who believed in this believed that they supplanted or represented God. "A little learning is a dangerous thing..." How is all this linked together? Through rationalism, in his book, an evil thing, because it is a Rational Individual, not an individual linked to the family, a family linked to the village, a village linked to the commonwealth, a commonwealth linked to a nation.

RUBBISH.

He clearly shows the relationship between the capitalism and protestant and constitutional rights that derive from divine rights of kings.

Nowhere does he reject Rationalism, rather he highligits Hegelianism and its influence in political laws and economics.

I hope that even an intellectual coward like you, never daring to expose himself to criticism or to ridicule, therefore never daring to think on his own, can see the glaring fallacy in this.

Its wisdom to refuse to wrestle with a PIG in the muck, though the pig might claim it cowardice.

So he says that capitalism and communism were political systems based on the rational, and so too was economics, specifically, neo-classical economics (although he quotes the classical authors, Adam Smith, for instance, in a way that never makes it clear if he is or is not aware of the distinction between classical and neo-classical economics) (Hint - there is a difference). And this is his first video.

So ? He was not presenting a lecture on classical and neo classical economics, his topic was the Indian economy model.

This is what I was testing to see, if you had had even a clue about what was being said in it, and if you realised how many feet of clay your idol had demonstrated. He gave example after example about the triumph of Chinese economics, without the slightest realisation that that economy had triumphed through applications of western paradigms of economics and politics. In fact, in the subsequent videos, it becomes clear that he had actually got the entire matter wrong, and that he attributes the Chinese miracle to totally fictitious elements in the economy, as well as assuming, wrongly, that the gap between the Indian organised sector and the Indian economic performance was filled in by native 'bare-foot' entrepreneurs. To do him credit, he did get the key question of employment in India, and the problem of jobless growth, and he did make Narayanmurthy, dense as the man is, aware that even the very large number of jobs created by the IT services sector was negated by the collapse of jobs elsewhere (he didn't, however, pause to understand the intimate link between the depopulation of agriculture and the fall in the employment level).

Nobody gives a $Hit about what you are testing to see.

And nobody gives a $hit about your continued Ad Hominem attacks on Gurumurthy. It only demonstrates to everybody your intellectual bankruptcy.

Nowhere did he claim that chinese economy was not through western paradigms. In fact Rajiv Malhotra called chinese economy a shadow of the west. This is just another strawman.

NCEUS report show that 86% of workers in India work in the unorganized sector. So gurumurthy was right in talking about the native bare foot entrepreneurs.

I ploughed through the entire set of three videos and only then asked you if you had understood the point of view, and if so, what were your views on them. You refused to incriminate yourself, quite rightly, of course, and tap-danced around these and other issues the whole of last night; you would not engage with the contents of the first video, so there was no question of taking up the contents of the second and third videos.

I have no reason to be the spokesperson of Gurumurthy. He does a splendid job of giving a very clear talk about his views.

I have engaged with the contents of his videos with other posters who were not charlatans like you. They posted and I responded multiple times.

It is for these reasons, and not for some flimsy ego-engagement, that I stayed out of any comment on this rubbish: the major reason being that you yourself had not read it, and that therefore it would be difficult to make a statement that would be understood on both sides by both sets of people.

It is a pity that you did not have the patience to read the damn things first.

I will not have anything to do with this thread or the other one, for obvious reasons.

Again I don't give a rats @ss to why you stayed away. But your deliberate attempt to encourage people to not view that video is clear evidence of bad faith and deliberate agenda.

I will reply to any and all relevant posts on the topic. And I will continue to contemptuously reject any Irrelevant ad hominems and post with zero substance. That will continue to be my pattern with you.

 

[Nilgiri]

On Joe's request (all my humble opinion of course):

Part 1 (Global history + economic systems rising from Christian world/politics):

1. USA reset was different (in opposition to European system), clear inherent, inalienable, god given (direct) rights (rather than lease of rights from king of divine authority). Disingenous for Guru to skip this over.

2. Guru correct about common law system inherited from UK (India, Canada etc), there are no inalienable rights essentially

3. Pre-existing (to British Raj) right to property and life in India (being somewhat similar in essence to US), was not codified politically in a larger national level and was somewhat variable in history (there were clearly bad kings and tyrants etc well before foreign invasions started).

4. Hobbes, from church to state "divine right"....essentially correct

5. Commentary on Max Weber perspective w.r.t India, China largely correct

6. Truman overarching doctrine + Marxism (to replace any non-western philosophy) + UN initial globalism (on western liberal, individual centric) commentary also largely correct

7. Disagree with capitalism being fully materialistic only, it is more defined (imo) on anti consolidated state economic power/reach past public goods (but to rather allow organic free market to exist for allocation of resources esp w.r.t commodities)

8. Capitalism can definitely have spiritual and non-monetary aspects (disagree with Guru), it is however largely neutral regarding them as they portend to economic forces

9. "Purpose" of capitalism is lot more advanced, I would disagree with it being equivalent and same purpose of communism. There was definitely an overlap (material wellbeing), but capitalism approaches this somewhat scientifically and broadly in that material gain is the only real way to measure progress objectively. It does not exclude other forms of progress inherently, just adopts neutral tone to them since they cannot as easily be objectively measured. This is a key distinction Guru misses.

10. It really depends how you define capitalism given there are many types and forms of capitalism. Pure material driven capitalism (to the complete exclusion of other social aspects) is only one form. There are others. There are ongoing debates and schools of thought regarding this. Sankranti for instance argues a lot on the Hegel perspective which is fine, we just have to realise there are competing streams of definition here on what we mean.

11. Commentary on Karl Marx spot on. Declaring backwardness emotionally (on one's own internalised perspective) rather than with facts and logic. Even supporting colonialism for a greater "environment" creation.

12. Fukuyama works are interesting but do contain flaws. Well worth reading for those interested in this subject.

13. "One size fits all" flaw (for any economic system) completely spot on.

14. Anti globalist forces gathering pace (cultural identity + decentralising debate) = good relevant thing, agree with Guru


Part 2: (The Indian context/model):

1. Agree with India self-recognising but still largely unprepared right now in the intellectual level for a homegrown, optimised model.

2. Don't buy the anti-Hindu atmosphere argument (supposedly kept sheltered privately intrinsically/institutionally in independent India by essence) too much. Rather it was suppresed/displaced (at the fountain head of national/political/economic thought) by the islamic conquest + colonialism earlier and the substitution of this in some unfettered way by "diluted" Marxism (after independence). There was massive inevitable inertia inherited from this. It is being reclaimed now over time.

3. Commentary on micro enterprise largely correct (providing the base... but not counted as "formal") Effects will be seen 2020 onwards for judging on it.

4. Commentary on the Deng Xiaopeng efforts/reforms 100000000% spot on. I talked about this earlier in other threads:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/high...-than-philippines.531612/page-6#post-10065480

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/high...-than-philippines.531612/page-8#post-10067971

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/comp...desh-and-myanmar.522876/page-43#post-10048746

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...-weakened-economy.529479/page-3#post-10033184

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...-weakened-economy.529479/page-3#post-10033184


5. Decentralisation (ancient, more traditional based) vs (older now but new in context of history, static, large economic brakes applied) centralisation psyche in context of indian development model is spot on, definitely cannot rely on govt alone to change this

6. Small and Medium entrepreneurship, out of radar, commentary spot on.

7. Asking which spot has highest GDP per capita/productivity is disingenuous again, at what scale is the appropriate resolution? Can define highest GDP per capita as the 1 meter square around Mukesh Ambani etc

8. Still nice to hear the SME story in Gujarat, it definitely needs a massive research esp effect of the social capital Guru talking about and needs further context with other parts of India too and how best to capture and promote institutionally.

9. Overall agree on sustainable social contract need within society operating in free market, it is a strong resistance to unfettered materialism + liberalism + democracy living off each other to survive and inevitably creating a bust for every boom given their opposition to how humans intrinsically organise and structure themselves @Desert Fox

10. Over requesting needs from the society but refusing to give back to it (claiming independence selectively) is definitely a major issue

11. Commentary on west overall correct and Max weber commentary being perception rather than prognosis correct. Extreme high individualism definitely creates a void (by erosion of immediate local social capital) that the larger ever-growing type of social forces will occupy in their most nefarious ways for sure (big govt overreach). This is definitely already happening in the "post prime" developed countries.

12. I disagree its a defeat for Christianity/abrahamic religion.

13. Disagree vehemently its in the root of Christianity. The concept of order and structured dominion from disorder and total generic entropy is found in nearly all culture and definitely all civilisation.

14. Too simplistic analysis of the West in what they conserve/exploit etc. Catch phrases of anthropocentric and ecocentric is disingenuous too the way they are being applied liberally here.

15. Destruction of core culture in West is definitely an issue, results are coming to roost now

16. Oversimplistic on the multi-cultural USA. This is a massive subject by itself. They are not fully wrong or right on this. India is not exactly stellar at some inherent cultural level on this. But I feel India overall does a good job on this social aspect in its specific environment because of its cultural inheritance and evolution.

17. Political shenanigans on "unskilled" definition (and all trades covered by this) because of a elitist, lutyens need to rid "caste" on paper (and then they hypocritically brought it back in another much broader form by mandal commision) has definitely been extremely harmful and needs correction ASAP.

18. Definitely the loss (whatever scale it happened for political convenience/propoganda feel) of traditional apprenticing has been a terrible loss for India

19. Family + community driven development....agree completely.

20. Whoever that idiot US Indian economist was that said cut savings to spend more (Esp for Indian women, the repository of the concept of goddess Laxmi) is a complete moron. No idea of what investment is and means....and why that is fundamentally important for capex cycles.

21. Economist arrogance is definite issue when you are not a globalist shill, I have come across it myself too. Completely agree with Guru here.

22. 100% correct on US welfare spending going to collapse the US economy at current rate:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chin...y-and-time-ruchir-sharma.475008/#post-9153036

23. Milton Friedman reference @Joe Shearer

24. Western liberal "Anthropological modernity" is destroying the social capital. Spot on. It has been proven and validated with the black community in the US (destroy the families, get the votes, get the neo-plantation). It is now being expanded there to everyone else with gusto. Europe has less heterogeneity so has done better overall (through chance rather than design)....but the design is catching up there now too with the mass import of people effectively going on welfare (both direct and indirect) without paying in. The govt benefits by having captive votes to expand its role in society till the collapse happens.

25. State dependent society = grandiose self-destructive problem. 100% spot on.


Part 3. (India future in the world)

1. Disagree with Japan and China not having an original culture, China had strong Confucian roots before Buddhism. Japan had its pre-Shinto culture too. Definitely India influenced them, but its not some overarching level.

2. Guru too haughty and proud of Indian cultural prowess. Shadow civilisations, huh...

3. Really doubt Mao said that, I would like to see a valid source. Mao was a known sycophant at the same time being a autocrat narcissist...strange guy, not credible for this talk to begin with.

4. Crime Rates, I understand where he is coming from, but a lot of it is under-reported too. Cannot really compare across countries easily. I cannot criticise BD people on this forum on the lack of crediblity from their country alone, there is plenty to improve in India too before comparing crime rates with other major societies in the west etc.

5. Centralisation (Rajan, Govt, Media etc) vs decentralisation, optics versus reality revisited. 100% agree again...but must be wary of becoming too subjective on the matter...."the disconnect"

6. Performing India vs publicity India....very true.

7. New tech to strengthen social capital is true in Indian culture (varying, often bad for other cultures esp post-prime), I have experienced in personal level too

8. Some "Western ppl who control the whole thing" for wikipedia is kind of silly talk. People who edit more pages get more credibility and rating (and over time ability to moderate and review changes), this is a standard model across the internet. The bias when it comes to subjective topics is somewhat true. More on youtube and facebook compared to wkipedia now. Only way to address is to make Indian equivalents and alternatives to hedge and compete. It will take time....meanwhile its good time to learn whats going right and wrong right now.

9. Maybe it changed some minds regarding India after Pokhran. I had to deal with gora snobs in middle school saying India is going to blow itself up. Very few people change their prejudice overnnight like what guru is suggesting imo. Its true Indian confidence levels rose with time....its not only hard power (pokhran) related though.

10. Indian Soft power civilisational footprint importance, I agree with. Relevance of it to solving Western liberal-induced woes may be crucial for promoting this over there. Overall its doing a great job inside the developing world largely without much help.

@Dungeness @Gibbs @Genesis @django @Hell hound @Zibago

For your reading at your discretion/interest and if anyone wants to talk about specific things more, I am all open for that.

@sankranti Thanks for posting the original videos here and starting this thread.

 

[Joe Shearer]

@Nilgiri

Brilliant. This is a tour de force. I have certain observations, and shall get down to them 'shortly' (meaning I don't know how long my pending tasks might take).

My sincere respect.

 

[Desert Fox]

On Joe's request (all my humble opinion of course):

Part 1 (Global history + economic systems rising from Christian world/politics):

1. USA reset was different (in opposition to European system), clear inherent, inalienable, god given (direct) rights (rather than lease of rights from king of divine authority). Disingenous for Guru to skip this over.

2. Guru correct about common law system inherited from UK (India, Canada etc), there are no inalienable rights essentially

3. Pre-existing (to British Raj) right to property and life in India (being somewhat similar in essence to US), was not codified politically in a larger national level and was somewhat variable in history (there were clearly bad kings and tyrants etc well before foreign invasions started).

4. Hobbes, from church to state "divine right"....essentially correct

5. Commentary on Max Weber perspective w.r.t India, China largely correct

6. Truman overarching doctrine + Marxism (to replace any non-western philosophy) + UN initial globalism (on western liberal, individual centric) commentary also largely correct

7. Disagree with capitalism being fully materialistic only, it is more defined (imo) on anti consolidated state economic power/reach past public goods (but to rather allow organic free market to exist for allocation of resources esp w.r.t commodities)

8. Capitalism can definitely have spiritual and non-monetary aspects (disagree with Guru), it is however largely neutral regarding them as they portend to economic forces

9. "Purpose" of capitalism is lot more advanced, I would disagree with it being equivalent and same purpose of communism. There was definitely an overlap (material wellbeing), but capitalism approaches this somewhat scientifically and broadly in that material gain is the only real way to measure progress objectively. It does not exclude other forms of progress inherently, just adopts neutral tone to them since they cannot as easily be objectively measured. This is a key distinction Guru misses.

10. It really depends how you define capitalism given there are many types and forms of capitalism. Pure material driven capitalism (to the complete exclusion of other social aspects) is only one form. There are others. There are ongoing debates and schools of thought regarding this. Sankranti for instance argues a lot on the Hegel perspective which is fine, we just have to realise there are competing streams of definition here on what we mean.

11. Commentary on Karl Marx spot on. Declaring backwardness emotionally (on one's own internalised perspective) rather than with facts and logic. Even supporting colonialism for a greater "environment" creation.

12. Fukuyama works are interesting but do contain flaws. Well worth reading for those interested in this subject.

13. "One size fits all" flaw (for any economic system) completely spot on.

14. Anti globalist forces gathering pace (cultural identity + decentralising debate) = good relevant thing, agree with Guru


Part 2: (The Indian context/model):

1. Agree with India self-recognising but still largely unprepared right now in the intellectual level for a homegrown, optimised model.

2. Don't buy the anti-Hindu atmosphere argument (supposedly kept sheltered privately intrinsically/institutionally in independent India by essence) too much. Rather it was suppresed/displaced (at the fountain head of national/political/economic thought) by the islamic conquest + colonialism earlier and the substitution of this in some unfettered way by "diluted" Marxism (after independence). There was massive inevitable inertia inherited from this. It is being reclaimed now over time.

3. Commentary on micro enterprise largely correct (providing the base... but not counted as "formal") Effects will be seen 2020 onwards for judging on it.

4. Commentary on the Deng Xiaopeng efforts/reforms 100000000% spot on. I talked about this earlier in other threads:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/high...-than-philippines.531612/page-6#post-10065480

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/high...-than-philippines.531612/page-8#post-10067971

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/comp...desh-and-myanmar.522876/page-43#post-10048746

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...-weakened-economy.529479/page-3#post-10033184

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...-weakened-economy.529479/page-3#post-10033184


5. Decentralisation (ancient, more traditional based) vs (older now but new in context of history, static, large economic brakes applied) centralisation psyche in context of indian development model is spot on, definitely cannot rely on govt alone to change this

6. Small and Medium entrepreneurship, out of radar, commentary spot on.

7. Asking which spot has highest GDP per capita/productivity is disingenuous again, at what scale is the appropriate resolution? Can define highest GDP per capita as the 1 meter square around Mukesh Ambani etc

8. Still nice to hear the SME story in Gujarat, it definitely needs a massive research esp effect of the social capital Guru talking about and needs further context with other parts of India too and how best to capture and promote institutionally.

9. Overall agree on sustainable social contract need within society operating in free market, it is a strong resistance to unfettered materialism + liberalism + democracy living off each other to survive and inevitably creating a bust for every boom given their opposition to how humans intrinsically organise and structure themselves @Desert Fox

10. Over requesting needs from the society but refusing to give back to it (claiming independence selectively) is definitely a major issue

11. Commentary on west overall correct and Max weber commentary being perception rather than prognosis correct. Extreme high individualism definitely creates a void (by erosion of immediate local social capital) that the larger ever-growing type of social forces will occupy in their most nefarious ways for sure (big govt overreach). This is definitely already happening in the "post prime" developed countries.

12. I disagree its a defeat for Christianity/abrahamic religion.

13. Disagree vehemently its in the root of Christianity. The concept of order and structured dominion from disorder and total generic entropy is found in nearly all culture and definitely all civilisation.

14. Too simplistic analysis of the West in what they conserve/exploit etc. Catch phrases of anthropocentric and ecocentric is disingenuous too the way they are being applied liberally here.

15. Destruction of core culture in West is definitely an issue, results are coming to roost now

16. Oversimplistic on the multi-cultural USA. This is a massive subject by itself. They are not fully wrong or right on this. India is not exactly stellar at some inherent cultural level on this. But I feel India overall does a good job on this social aspect in its specific environment because of its cultural inheritance and evolution.

17. Political shenanigans on "unskilled" definition (and all trades covered by this) because of a elitist, lutyens need to rid "caste" on paper (and then they hypocritically brought it back in another much broader form by mandal commision) has definitely been extremely harmful and needs correction ASAP.

18. Definitely the loss (whatever scale it happened for political convenience/propoganda feel) of traditional apprenticing has been a terrible loss for India

19. Family + community driven development....agree completely.

20. Whoever that idiot US Indian economist was that said cut savings to spend more (Esp for Indian women, the repository of the concept of goddess Laxmi) is a complete moron. No idea of what investment is and means....and why that is fundamentally important for capex cycles.

21. Economist arrogance is definite issue when you are not a globalist shill, I have come across it myself too. Completely agree with Guru here.

22. 100% correct on US welfare spending going to collapse the US economy at current rate:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chin...y-and-time-ruchir-sharma.475008/#post-9153036

23. Milton Friedman reference @Joe Shearer

24. Western liberal "Anthropological modernity" is destroying the social capital. Spot on. It has been proven and validated with the black community in the US (destroy the families, get the votes, get the neo-plantation). It is now being expanded there to everyone else with gusto. Europe has less heterogeneity so has done better overall (through chance rather than design)....but the design is catching up there now too with the mass import of people effectively going on welfare (both direct and indirect) without paying in. The govt benefits by having captive votes to expand its role in society till the collapse happens.

25. State dependent society = grandiose self-destructive problem. 100% spot on.


Part 3. (India future in the world)

1. Disagree with Japan and China not having an original culture, China had strong Confucian roots before Buddhism. Japan had its pre-Shinto culture too. Definitely India influenced them, but its not some overarching level.

2. Guru too haughty and proud of Indian cultural prowess. Shadow civilisations, huh...

3. Really doubt Mao said that, I would like to see a valid source. Mao was a known sycophant at the same time being a autocrat narcissist...strange guy, not credible for this talk to begin with.

4. Crime Rates, I understand where he is coming from, but a lot of it is under-reported too. Cannot really compare across countries easily. I cannot criticise BD people on this forum on the lack of crediblity from their country alone, there is plenty to improve in India too before comparing crime rates with other major societies in the west etc.

5. Centralisation (Rajan, Govt, Media etc) vs decentralisation, optics versus reality revisited. 100% agree again...but must be wary of becoming too subjective on the matter...."the disconnect"

6. Performing India vs publicity India....very true.

7. New tech to strengthen social capital is true in Indian culture (varying, often bad for other cultures esp post-prime), I have experienced in personal level too

8. Some "Western ppl who control the whole thing" for wikipedia is kind of silly talk. People who edit more pages get more credibility and rating (and over time ability to moderate and review changes), this is a standard model across the internet. The bias when it comes to subjective topics is somewhat true. More on youtube and facebook compared to wkipedia now. Only way to address is to make Indian equivalents and alternatives to hedge and compete. It will take time....meanwhile its good time to learn whats going right and wrong right now.

9. Maybe it changed some minds regarding India after Pokhran. I had to deal with gora snobs in middle school saying India is going to blow itself up. Very few people change their prejudice overnnight like what guru is suggesting imo. Its true Indian confidence levels rose with time....its not only hard power (pokhran) related though.

10. Indian Soft power civilisational footprint importance, I agree with. Relevance of it to solving Western liberal-induced woes may be crucial for promoting this over there. Overall its doing a great job inside the developing world largely without much help.

@Dungeness @Gibbs @Genesis @django @Hell hound @Zibago

For your reading at your discretion/interest and if anyone wants to talk about specific things more, I am all open for that.

@sankranti Thanks for posting the original videos here and starting this thread.

Thank you for the tag. A very long and detailed post. I will have to come back to it.

 

[Joe Shearer]

On Joe's request (all my humble opinion of course):

Invaluable. Since the hero who presented these to us refused to be drawn, I had to get an independent opinion with credibility and authority, so that his views could at least form a backdrop for discussion.

AT THIS POINT, what I have to say are in response to @Nilgiri, not quite so much in response to Gurumurthy, although at every point, I shall try to orient my comments towards the original, towards Gurumurthy's remarks on the video.

Part 1 (Global history + economic systems rising from Christian world/politics):

Not quite global history; this covered the politics of the state from the point of view presented by the classical political scientists Hobbes and Locke, and, by extension, and unmentioned, Bentham (through whose utilitarianism the concept of rational man was to some limited extent derived). There was some deeply distorted thinking about the historical aspects (strictly speaking, there was no history), and some comments about economics that were based on the assumptions drawn from the earlier political analysis.

It becomes difficult to deal with this synthesising approach, that combines all these, political science, and economics, and a certain level of basic jurisprudence, to arrive at a world view. One is then set the task of following the same thought process, and tracing it through switches in context.

This is not unnatural, but it is a degree complex. Perhaps this is because Gurumurthy was here chatting with an acknowledged friend and supporter of his views, and allowed himself the liberty of ellipsis, of sketching in the bare outlines of a thought and moving on.

1. USA reset was different (in opposition to European system), clear inherent, inalienable, god given (direct) rights (rather than lease of rights from king of divine authority). Disingenous for Guru to skip this over.

2. Guru correct about common law system inherited from UK (India, Canada etc), there are no inalienable rights essentially

First, @Nilgiri is perfectly correct in saying that the US variant, not mentioned by Gurumurthy, had a different view of human rights from other common law systems. He does not, as Gurumurthy in the original does not, go into the matter of human rights in the continental systems of law.

Second, in common law, there are no inalienable rights essentially because of the nature of that law itself. It is based on statute and on interpretation of that statute by courts, and there is an enormous dependence on precedents set by equal or superior courts in determining the law on a particular matter. For Gurumurthy to claim that this is an inherent defect universal to common law jurisdictions is too sweeping, and contradictions to his claim are available within the Indian legal system itself (and, by implication, would have been available within the Pakistani system or the Bangladeshi systems, except to the extent affected in the one by the deterrent clause that the tenets of Islam must illuminate all profane law-making; I do not know enough about the situation in the other).

Third, on the question of divine right itself, at a level of precise definition, divine right was not derived from the concept of a king being equated to God, and representing God among men. On the contrary, it was based on recognition of royal qualities, of leadership qualities by divinity, and frequently expressed through the intermediation of a prophet. For instance, the recognition and anointing of Saul by the prophet Samuel. More later. [/quote]

3. Pre-existing (to British Raj) right to property and life in India (being somewhat similar in essence to US), was not codified politically in a larger national level and was somewhat variable in history (there were clearly bad kings and tyrants etc well before foreign invasions started).

4. Hobbes, from church to state "divine right"....essentially correct

5. Commentary on Max Weber perspective w.r.t India, China largely correct

6. Truman overarching doctrine + Marxism (to replace any non-western philosophy) + UN initial globalism (on western liberal, individual centric) commentary also largely correct

7. Disagree with capitalism being fully materialistic only, it is more defined (imo) on anti consolidated state economic power/reach past public goods (but to rather allow organic free market to exist for allocation of resources esp w.r.t commodities)

8. Capitalism can definitely have spiritual and non-monetary aspects (disagree with Guru), it is however largely neutral regarding them as they portend to economic forces

9. "Purpose" of capitalism is lot more advanced, I would disagree with it being equivalent and same purpose of communism. There was definitely an overlap (material wellbeing), but capitalism approaches this somewhat scientifically and broadly in that material gain is the only real way to measure progress objectively. It does not exclude other forms of progress inherently, just adopts neutral tone to them since they cannot as easily be objectively measured. This is a key distinction Guru misses.

10. It really depends how you define capitalism given there are many types and forms of capitalism. Pure material driven capitalism (to the complete exclusion of other social aspects) is only one form. There are others. There are ongoing debates and schools of thought regarding this. Sankranti for instance argues a lot on the Hegel perspective which is fine, we just have to realise there are competing streams of definition here on what we mean.

11. Commentary on Karl Marx spot on. Declaring backwardness emotionally (on one's own internalised perspective) rather than with facts and logic. Even supporting colonialism for a greater "environment" creation.

12. Fukuyama works are interesting but do contain flaws. Well worth reading for those interested in this subject.

13. "One size fits all" flaw (for any economic system) completely spot on.

14. Anti globalist forces gathering pace (cultural identity + decentralising debate) = good relevant thing, agree with Guru


Part 2: (The Indian context/model):

1. Agree with India self-recognising but still largely unprepared right now in the intellectual level for a homegrown, optimised model.

2. Don't buy the anti-Hindu atmosphere argument (supposedly kept sheltered privately intrinsically/institutionally in independent India by essence) too much. Rather it was suppresed/displaced (at the fountain head of national/political/economic thought) by the islamic conquest + colonialism earlier and the substitution of this in some unfettered way by "diluted" Marxism (after independence). There was massive inevitable inertia inherited from this. It is being reclaimed now over time.

3. Commentary on micro enterprise largely correct (providing the base... but not counted as "formal") Effects will be seen 2020 onwards for judging on it.

4. Commentary on the Deng Xiaopeng efforts/reforms 100000000% spot on. I talked about this earlier in other threads:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/high...-than-philippines.531612/page-6#post-10065480

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/high...-than-philippines.531612/page-8#post-10067971

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/comp...desh-and-myanmar.522876/page-43#post-10048746

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...-weakened-economy.529479/page-3#post-10033184

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...-weakened-economy.529479/page-3#post-10033184


5. Decentralisation (ancient, more traditional based) vs (older now but new in context of history, static, large economic brakes applied) centralisation psyche in context of indian development model is spot on, definitely cannot rely on govt alone to change this

6. Small and Medium entrepreneurship, out of radar, commentary spot on.

7. Asking which spot has highest GDP per capita/productivity is disingenuous again, at what scale is the appropriate resolution? Can define highest GDP per capita as the 1 meter square around Mukesh Ambani etc

8. Still nice to hear the SME story in Gujarat, it definitely needs a massive research esp effect of the social capital Guru talking about and needs further context with other parts of India too and how best to capture and promote institutionally.

9. Overall agree on sustainable social contract need within society operating in free market, it is a strong resistance to unfettered materialism + liberalism + democracy living off each other to survive and inevitably creating a bust for every boom given their opposition to how humans intrinsically organise and structure themselves @Desert Fox

10. Over requesting needs from the society but refusing to give back to it (claiming independence selectively) is definitely a major issue

11. Commentary on west overall correct and Max weber commentary being perception rather than prognosis correct. Extreme high individualism definitely creates a void (by erosion of immediate local social capital) that the larger ever-growing type of social forces will occupy in their most nefarious ways for sure (big govt overreach). This is definitely already happening in the "post prime" developed countries.

12. I disagree its a defeat for Christianity/abrahamic religion.

13. Disagree vehemently its in the root of Christianity. The concept of order and structured dominion from disorder and total generic entropy is found in nearly all culture and definitely all civilisation.

14. Too simplistic analysis of the West in what they conserve/exploit etc. Catch phrases of anthropocentric and ecocentric is disingenuous too the way they are being applied liberally here.

15. Destruction of core culture in West is definitely an issue, results are coming to roost now

16. Oversimplistic on the multi-cultural USA. This is a massive subject by itself. They are not fully wrong or right on this. India is not exactly stellar at some inherent cultural level on this. But I feel India overall does a good job on this social aspect in its specific environment because of its cultural inheritance and evolution.

17. Political shenanigans on "unskilled" definition (and all trades covered by this) because of a elitist, lutyens need to rid "caste" on paper (and then they hypocritically brought it back in another much broader form by mandal commision) has definitely been extremely harmful and needs correction ASAP.

18. Definitely the loss (whatever scale it happened for political convenience/propoganda feel) of traditional apprenticing has been a terrible loss for India

19. Family + community driven development....agree completely.

20. Whoever that idiot US Indian economist was that said cut savings to spend more (Esp for Indian women, the repository of the concept of goddess Laxmi) is a complete moron. No idea of what investment is and means....and why that is fundamentally important for capex cycles.

21. Economist arrogance is definite issue when you are not a globalist shill, I have come across it myself too. Completely agree with Guru here.

22. 100% correct on US welfare spending going to collapse the US economy at current rate:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chin...y-and-time-ruchir-sharma.475008/#post-9153036

23. Milton Friedman reference @Joe Shearer

24. Western liberal "Anthropological modernity" is destroying the social capital. Spot on. It has been proven and validated with the black community in the US (destroy the families, get the votes, get the neo-plantation). It is now being expanded there to everyone else with gusto. Europe has less heterogeneity so has done better overall (through chance rather than design)....but the design is catching up there now too with the mass import of people effectively going on welfare (both direct and indirect) without paying in. The govt benefits by having captive votes to expand its role in society till the collapse happens.

25. State dependent society = grandiose self-destructive problem. 100% spot on.


Part 3. (India future in the world)

1. Disagree with Japan and China not having an original culture, China had strong Confucian roots before Buddhism. Japan had its pre-Shinto culture too. Definitely India influenced them, but its not some overarching level.

2. Guru too haughty and proud of Indian cultural prowess. Shadow civilisations, huh...

3. Really doubt Mao said that, I would like to see a valid source. Mao was a known sycophant at the same time being a autocrat narcissist...strange guy, not credible for this talk to begin with.

4. Crime Rates, I understand where he is coming from, but a lot of it is under-reported too. Cannot really compare across countries easily. I cannot criticise BD people on this forum on the lack of crediblity from their country alone, there is plenty to improve in India too before comparing crime rates with other major societies in the west etc.

5. Centralisation (Rajan, Govt, Media etc) vs decentralisation, optics versus reality revisited. 100% agree again...but must be wary of becoming too subjective on the matter...."the disconnect"

6. Performing India vs publicity India....very true.

7. New tech to strengthen social capital is true in Indian culture (varying, often bad for other cultures esp post-prime), I have experienced in personal level too

8. Some "Western ppl who control the whole thing" for wikipedia is kind of silly talk. People who edit more pages get more credibility and rating (and over time ability to moderate and review changes), this is a standard model across the internet. The bias when it comes to subjective topics is somewhat true. More on youtube and facebook compared to wkipedia now. Only way to address is to make Indian equivalents and alternatives to hedge and compete. It will take time....meanwhile its good time to learn whats going right and wrong right now.

9. Maybe it changed some minds regarding India after Pokhran. I had to deal with gora snobs in middle school saying India is going to blow itself up. Very few people change their prejudice overnnight like what guru is suggesting imo. Its true Indian confidence levels rose with time....its not only hard power (pokhran) related though.

10. Indian Soft power civilisational footprint importance, I agree with. Relevance of it to solving Western liberal-induced woes may be crucial for promoting this over there. Overall its doing a great job inside the developing world largely without much help.

@Dungeness @Gibbs @Genesis @django @Hell hound @Zibago

For your reading at your discretion/interest and if anyone wants to talk about specific things more, I am all open for that.

@sankranti Thanks for posting the original videos here and starting this thread.