Why so many Indians back on the forum?

[SuvarnaTeja]

“My house might not be best looking house on the block, but it’s still my house.”

The house has been infested with pests. The only solution is to burn it down.

 

[LakeHawk180]

I wrote this some days ago : "No nation state exists. Nation state is an artificial concept first set up after the French Revolution."

We should be speaking for a borderless Earth and before that we should speak for bringing evolution, advancement and harmony in our nation states.

Sure. Perhaps as a philosophical exercise on what future should look like. I’m all for this, actually.

Coming to the present though, like many social constructs that have matured over millennia of human development; — empires, nation states, while an abstract notion like money, is something quite tangible in the human psyche. As long as that remains true for most people, it will probably continue to have meaning for me as well, personally.

 

[Paitoo]

I wrote this some days ago : "No nation state exists. Nation state is an artificial concept first set up after the French Revolution."

We should be speaking for a borderless Earth and before that we should speak for bringing evolution, advancement and harmony in our nation states.

As long as humans believe in the following, nation states will always exist:

• The other person has something that is mine
• I do not have enough and I can snatch it from others
• The other person should be like me / should be subservient to me because they are inferior

Nation states result from a need to secure ourselves from people of the above kind. Do you see the above human behaviour changing in the future? Because there is no absolute level of prosperity or knowledge where we can reach and say 'bus, ab ho gaya. Sab barabar hain'. The goalposts are always shifting

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

Sure. Perhaps as a philosophical exercise on what future should look like. I’m all for this, actually.

Coming to the present though, like many social constructs that have matured over millennia of human development; — empires, nation states, while an abstract notion like money, is something quite tangible in the human psyche. As long as that remains true for most people, it will probably continue to have meaning for me as well, personally.

India is a fake nation. So don't get emotionally attached.

 

[peagle]

As long as humans believe in the following, nation states will always exist:

• The other person has something that is mine
• I do not have enough and I can snatch it from others
• The other person should be like me / should be subservient to me because they are inferior

Nation states result from a need to secure ourselves from people of the above kind. Do you see the above human behaviour changing in the future? Because there is no absolute level of prosperity or knowledge where we can reach and say 'bus, ab ho gaya. Sab barabar hain'. The goalposts are always shifting

On the face of it, you present a reasoned argument and it seems to make sense.

But, if we consider that most if not all nation states already consist of multiple ethnicities, then surely the points you raise have already been countered to some degree. They have agreed to live within those defined boundaries of a nation state.

It is not a big stretch to expand those boundaries to a global level, into a global existence.
It is just a matter of accepting, whichever form we decide to live in, merely relates to acceptance of that reality.

Human societies are always in the process of evolution.

 

[LakeHawk180]

The house has been infested with pests. The only solution is to burn it down.

India is a fake nation. So don't get emotionally attached.

I just don’t have the luxury of burning my house down every time the season turns. Not enough houses, you see.

Emotional attachment is often unreasonable depending on your vantage point. It’s part of the human condition (for now), I hope you can excuse such frailties.

 

[Paitoo]

On the face of it, you present a reasoned argument and it seems to make sense.

But, if we consider that most if not all nation states already consist of multiple ethnicities, then surely the points you raise have already been countered to some degree. They have agreed to live within those defined boundaries of a nation state.

It is not a big stretch to expand those boundaries to a global level, into a global existence.
It is just a matter of accepting, whichever form we decide to live in, merely relates to acceptance of that reality.

Human societies are always in the process of evolution.

These are good points. Diversity within a nation state can and does exist and can lead to the same frictions that are possible at the nation level. In fact that is why we have laws, judiciary and law enforcement agencies.

Then what changes at nation level? I think it is the need of people to lead/rule, which itself feeds on the need of some people to be led. The latter, in any kind of administrative structure far outnumber the former. The leader types then want their own dominions where they are supreme, and therefore we have history being written and fed to keep alive the differences. So maybe the correct question is - Will the need to lead/rule ever go away?

I dont think humans believe in this it is inherent to all of us to increase our chance to survive/thrive at all costs which can require at time subjugation or exploitation of others it is hard to see how this quality will completely go away when it has served us so well our specie is surviving and thriving.

Evolution / Survival is a good argument too, and perhaps an eternal condition of all species.

 

[peagle]

These are good points. Diversity within a nation state can and does exist and can lead to the same frictions that are possible at the nation level. In fact that is why we have laws, judiciary and law enforcement agencies.

Then what changes at nation level? I think it is the need of people to lead/rule, which itself feeds on the need of some people to be led. The latter, in any kind of administrative structure far outnumber the former. The leader types then want their own dominions where they are supreme, and therefore we have history being written and fed to keep alive the differences. So maybe the correct question is - Will the need to lead/rule ever go away?

The points you raise are different from the previous discussion, although linked. The need to be ruled and governed by laws and structures surely would also apply at a global level. Evolution is always about considered natural growth. And, with that natural growth there would naturally arise suitable structures to support a global order, if and when human society decides to take that leap, to some degree, we already have.

Please remember global and regional organisations already have an historical existence. They have become more stable and have delivered with increased effectiveness over time. They are evolving.

In the sphere of global governance, before the UN, came the League of Nations, humanity learnt from those mistakes and the UN has delivered far more then people recognise. It has survived far longer then the League of nations, so the evolution is continuing. One cannot predict the future so it is hard to predict the outcomes on something that is completely new, but it is also hard and perhaps unfair to dismiss a global existence, hopefully a peaceful one.

 

[xuxu1457]

Because of the more diversity here and the serious homogenization in Indian forums, where people from Pakistan or China will basically be closed in India forum.

 

[SirHatesALot]

missed the loving and caring attitude of pdf

 

[jamahir]

Sure. Perhaps as a philosophical exercise on what future should look like. I’m all for this, actually.

Coming to the present though, like many social constructs that have matured over millennia of human development; — empires, nation states, while an abstract notion like money, is something quite tangible in the human psyche. As long as that remains true for most people, it will probably continue to have meaning for me as well, personally.

1. You say that social and political constructs have matured over millennia but you also say that The End of the Nation State can be a philosophical exercise that can be considered at "some point in the future". Well, future starts with events and idea done in the present. Future isn't some isolated thing. It happens starting in the Now.

2. Money might be a tangible thing but it is also an artificial construct invented to have a convenient means of exchanging goods and services to replace the many-a-time inconvenient barter system and the process of just snatching away someone's things. I have proposed this socio-economic system which is part-Communist-realization in the sense that it has a money system, though an evolved money system, but manages to eradicate economic classes ( rich, middle, poor ). This socio-economic system can be applied in any human society.

As long as humans believe in the following, nation states will always exist:

• The other person has something that is mine
• I do not have enough and I can snatch it from others
• The other person should be like me / should be subservient to me because they are inferior

Nation states result from a need to secure ourselves from people of the above kind. Do you see the above human behaviour changing in the future? Because there is no absolute level of prosperity or knowledge where we can reach and say 'bus, ab ho gaya. Sab barabar hain'. The goalposts are always shifting

@peagle has answered that very well in post# 95.

 

[Indos]

Indian Defense Forum Members

Pakistan Defense Forum members

 

[Maula Jatt]

missed the loving and caring attitude of pdf

PDF's administration

 

[Joe Shearer]

Sure. Perhaps as a philosophical exercise on what future should look like. I’m all for this, actually.

Coming to the present though, like many social constructs that have matured over millennia of human development; — empires, nation states, while an abstract notion like money, is something quite tangible in the human psyche. As long as that remains true for most people, it will probably continue to have meaning for me as well, personally.

Look at the post below, by @DrJekyll ; he is the closest to your standpoint. I like to think that I am in that position, but I cannot bear to hear some of the insults offered, and tend to get disturbed at those times. Foolish, undoubtedly, considering that 80% of those who are not Indians are really Internet cannon-fodder; but also unfair to the 20% who are gentlemen (and ladies) of the greatest integrity and respectability, and whose unsupported word I do not hesitate to accept as perfectly true.

For their sake, I find some resonance in the very subtle classification offered by @SuvarnaTeja, whose very complicated mind should not obscure the force behind many of his arguments.

For the sake of his personal integrity, I sympathise with Jamahir, without necessarily agreeing with all that he holds as true.

I hope you too will find friends on PDF. It is not at all difficult; I have some dozen or so, at the very least, probably more, and among them are four five people whom I respect above all others. As they say in the children's nursery rhyme,
"When they're good, they're very, very good,
When they're bad, they're horrid."

Because of the more diversity here and the serious homogenization in Indian forums, where people from Pakistan or China will basically be closed in India forum.
View attachment 817199

I regret greatly that this is painfully true. There is one, and only one, Indian forum that even comes close to a balanced stand on the question of other nationalities, and I am known there as a communist. That will show you how far right they are perched.

Sorry but a correction. Jamahir is part of the RPA ( Rationality Propagators Association ) so like I said in the other thread, both the Sanghis and the Tableeghis should be countered.

I am sure @Joe Shearer would also be hesitant to be, like the Americans say I think, button holed in this context.



What is "bleachers" ?

LOL.

Open stands 'bleached' by the sun. Not boxes covered and usually serviced lavishly by corporate sponsors.

 

[Joe Shearer]

@Joe Shearer is undecorated Mod

Want to get me beaten up?

So you are in search of Confirmation bias and Subjective validation

Indian Defense Forum Members

View attachment 817201

Pakistan Defense Forum members

View attachment 817203
View attachment 817202

I saw what you did.

There are, actually, other forums like PDF. Ethically I feel unable to mention them in this forum.

​