Monday, September 06, 2010

der spiegel: Obama's Misguided Approach (dooms the US)

sep 6th, 2010

why obama is failing: the democrats are trying to turn america away from its core competence and core values of self-reliance and the protestant work ethic.

exactly how the congress is turning india away from its core competence and core values as an indic civilization and making it a weak imitation of europe and arabia. 

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: B

 

Der Spiegel, 02/09/2010

Obama's Misguided Approach

America Has Become Too European

A Commentary by Thomas Straubhaar

Thomas Straubhaar is a professor of economics at the University of Hamburg and director of the Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWI). In early 2010 he became the Helmut Schmidt Fellow at the Transatlantic Academy in Washington DC.

----------------

The Obama administration and the Federal Reserve want to fix the United States economy by spending more money. But while that approach might work for Europe, it is risky for the US. The nation would be better off embracing traditional American values like self-reliance and small government.

There's no question about it: The 20th century was America's era. The United States rose rapidly from virtually nothing to become the most politically powerful and economically strongest country in the world. But the financial crisis and subsequent recession have now raised doubts about its future. Are we currently witnessing the beginning of the end of the American era?

A firm belief in the individual's ability, ideas, courage, will and a reliance on one's own resources brought the US to the top. The American dream promised everyone the chance of upward mobility -- literally from rags to riches, from minimum wage to millionaire. The individual's pursuit of happiness was seen as the crucial foundation for the well-being of society, rather than the benevolent state which cares for its subjects -- and certainly not the welfare state, which provides a social safety net for its citizens.

In the American system, every man was responsible for himself -- in good times and bad. No one could count on government assistance, not even the wannabe millionaire who did not make it and ended up homeless.

For many US citizens, the financial crisis has turned the American dream into a nightmare. Millions of Americans are struggling with high levels of debt, and not only because they bought overpriced houses during the housing boom and can no longer afford their mortgages. Often families are burdened with loans they took out during better times for cars, furniture, electronic gadgets or university tuition. Uncertainty and worries about the future are keeping many families awake at night.

From 'Hire and Fire' to Just 'Fire'

The economic data reveals just how deep the misery is. After a good beginning to the year, the economic recovery in the US has slowed significantly. There are hardly any new jobs, and the official US unemployment rate remains high at 9.5 percent. The actual unemployment rate could be almost twice as high, partially because of the many Americans who are working part time against their will and also because of the millions of people locked up in the country's prisons.

Particularly troubling is the phenomenon of long-term unemployment, something which is unusual in the US. The number of people who have been without work for more than six months has skyrocketed as a result of the recession, from just over 1 million to 6.8 million. The traditional policy of "hire and fire" has become a one-way street: Now it is all firing and no hiring.

The state is also suffering as a result. Heavily indebted state, county and city governments have less money to spend. Even before the crisis, roads full of potholes were part of everyday life in some places, as were power outages and other problems with the public energy and water supply. What's new, however, is that some cities in America are deliberately choosing to cut core services, such as switching off street lighting. Last winter, Colorado Springs, which with its 400,000 inhabitants is the second largest city in the state of Colorado, turned off one-third of its street lights to save money.

Nothing is immune from the wave of budget cuts, it seems. Schools have been closed and teachers laid off. Roads have been allowed to fall into disrepair and parks left to rot.

Fear of the Double Dip

It appears that the US economy, after the worst crisis of the postwar period, is slow to recover its old dynamism, unlike in previous recessions. Some economists are warning of a double-dip recession, and putting forward radical proposals to prevent this worst-case scenario from becoming reality.

In his widely read Friday column in the New York Times, the Nobel laureate economist and Obama adviser Paul Krugman last week called for the administration to bet the farm on a new attempt to stimulate the economy. Krugman recommended that the Federal Reserve buy up government securities and corporate bonds on a massive scale, announce its intention to keep short-term interest rates low in a bid to push down long-term rates, and raise its medium-term target for inflation. The Obama administration should also use its two government-sponsored real estate lenders, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to help heavily indebted homeowners refinance their mortgages, Krugman wrote.

On Friday, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke made a speech that sounded like it had been based on Krugman's column. He announced exactly what the New York Times columnist had called for, saying that the Fed was ready to intervene and would reanimate the sluggish US economy with further cash infusions if necessary. Then on Monday, Obama said he and his economic team were "hard at work in identifying additional measures" to stimulate the US economy.

A Return to Traditional American Virtues

Both the behavior of the American government and the Federal Reserve makes one thing clear: They do not see the solution to the US's economic woes in a return to traditional American virtues. Obama is not calling for the unleashing of market forces, as Ronald Reagan once did during an equally critical period in the early 1980s. On the contrary: Obama, driven by his own convictions and advised by economists who believe in government intervention, has taken a path that leads far away from those things that catapulted America to the top of the world in the past century.

 

The Obama administration's current policies rely on more government rather than personal responsibility and self-determination. They are administering to the patient more, not less, of exactly those things that led to the crisis.

The crash was partially caused by a policy of cheap money. If interest rates stay as low as they are, the state will get into more and more debt. One day these debts will have to be repaid, together with interest and compound interest. This will result in tax increases, which will reduce wages, the result of individuals' hard work. In addition, low interest rates will make saving unattractive for private individuals, thereby making it harder for America to break with its addiction to credit.

Helping America's Enemies

It's not just wealthy Republicans who are now accusing Barack Obama of betraying American ideals, although the conservative zealots of the Tea Party movement go too far in their criticism. They regard the Obama's administration approach to fighting the crisis as a treacherous attack by dark powers on the freedom of the United States. For them, Barack Obama is working on behalf of America's enemies.

But the move away from policies based on the American Way, which made the US by far the world's stronger economy, is also making well-meaning observers increasingly nervous. They are asking questions like: Why should the government care about the economic status or health of individuals? Why should one person pay for the misfortunes or illnesses of others?

The highest commandment of the American worldview was always to maximize individual freedoms and minimize government influence. It was an approach that was highly successful. According to that rule, self-directed action would remain the rule and government intervention the unpopular exception. But that is no longer the case.

Loss of Faith

This raises a crucial question: Is the US economy perhaps suffering less from an economic downturn and more from a serious structural problem? It seems plausible that the American economy has lost its belief in American principles. People no longer have confidence in the self-healing forces of the private sector, and the reliance on self-help and self-regulation to solve problems no longer exists.

The opposite strategy, one that seeks to treat the American patient with more government, is risky -- because it does not fit in with America's image of itself.

In Europe, the state is the result of centuries of struggle by relatively homogeneous societies and it has always played a major role in European societies. Therefore, a broad majority of the population supports economic policies based on government intervention, especially in difficult times. And Germany's current successes in dealing with the crisis suggest that the Europeans are probably right in their approach. The German economy will probably grow more this year than the American one. In Europe, government-prescribed medicine goes down well.

But what is good for Europe and Germany does not automatically work for the US. The settlers of the New World rejected everything, which included throwing out anything with a semblance of state authority. They fled Europe to find freedom. The sole shared goal of the settlers was to obtain individual freedom and live independently, which included the freedom to say what they wanted, believe what they wanted and write what they wanted. The state was seen as a way to facilitate this goal. The state should not interfere in people's lives, aside from securing freedom, peace and security. Economic prosperity was seen as the responsibility of the individual.

End of the American Way?

If you take this belief away from Americans, you are destroying the binds which interlink America's heterogeneous society. Removing this belief could lead to conflicts between different sections of society, clashes which have long bubbled beneath the surface.

What could help would be a return to the American Way, the approach which made the US so historically powerful. The success of this model is illustrated by history. In 1820, twice as many people lived in the United Kingdom as the US, and its economic performance (measured by gross domestic product) was three times as strong and the average standard of living (measured by GDP per person) was a quarter higher. Today, there are about five times more people living in the US than the UK, America's economic performance is about seven times better than Britain's and the average American is about 50 percent better off than the average Briton.

What should be done? It would be more intelligent to repair the elevator which helped the US rise from the bottom of the heap to the top, instead of trying to transplant a European style of operating onto American soil. Either the US follows the American Way -- an approach characterized by a shared history, economic success and constant progress -- or the US will have to adjust itself to the "European" way, sparking economic and social tensions in the process.

If the US manages to revert to its former ways, there is potential for hope. If not, the American age will have really come to an end.


15 comments:

Right Angle said...

I wish, this americanness comes to an end.. The very purpose of nation is lost in the american way of life, and the problem gets acute, when they export their stupid ideas to all countries..

A nation has to tax the traders, to support artisans, and empower farmers to produce more food.. that's what a nation is..

Our indian society is collapsing just because of this americanness..

Obama is right in saying Individual duty comes first before individual right..

America is so obsessed with individual rights, that they could not think anything beyong their selfish needs.. ITs time they think about individual duty

Harish said...

"A nation has to tax the traders, to support artisans, and empower farmers to produce more food.. that's what a nation is.."

Amusing definition of a nation...

"Our indian society is collapsing just because of this americanness.."

Yeah "Indian Society" was a shining beacon of light during the license raj wasn't it?

The reason Indian gov't abandoned that system was because it was forced to, being on the verge of bankruptcy.

Indian society is collapsing because the majority of Hindus are ignorant and prefer to live in ignorance. They still claim that "all religions are the same" and import destructive ideologies like feminism and socialism from the West instead of anything good.

No first world nation can have a majority of the people farming. Urbanization and a move toward more manufacturing and then services has been the trend in practically every developed country, the same countries that millions of Indians want to go to for a better life.

No one is lining up to go to Cuba or North Korea in India, everyone including commies want their kids to go to the US, UK or some such country.

Study the reasons why Singapore went from a third world nation to first world in 30 years. They did the exact opposite, instead of taxing producers to death they made it very easy to start businesses, innovate and invent. No coincidence that Hong Kong, South Korea and Taiwan pursued similar policies. The majority of people no longer farm in these countries and very few people want to return to backbreaking labour in the fields just to barely sustain themselves.

Obama is a corporate crony and his stupidity will just continue America's decline.

Right Angle said...

Mr. Harish..

I am from farming community, and i had done some amount of research on my personal capacity in to past indian society.. I could understand, that you have very bad idea about agriculture.. you are taking the stance of Mr.P.Chidambaram, that large amount of farming population is pulling india to backwardness..

I am really surprised, how people could even think like this.. I could only say, that you have so much contempt for farming, inspite of the fact that your daily food comes from the hardwork of so many farmers..

Secondly, you seem to be obsessed with china, hongkong, japan ,singapore, and US.. and you never see anything within us..

Thirdly, you could not see beyond the license raj.. Do you know how our society were before britishers?

Fourthly, you are seeing every section of the society exclusively, like the westerners.

Fifth, you are miguided notion of what a first world is and what a third world is..

if i were to reply to you, i have to deal with all the subjects mentioned above.. it will be another post..

But let me have few lines of my thoughts..

The fundamental need of any nation is food. In India, more than 50% of the people live in rural villages, produce their own food, and then contribute to the market used by urbanites.

20 years back, 80% of people took care of themselves, so that government can do all sorts of foolish things. But today, with craze for european nobility life style, more and more people are rushing towards urban. Which means, they stop producing their own food, and start consuming from the market.

Today, the urban population is just around 40% and we are seeing how much food catastrophe we are having. The food prices are in the rise continuously.

Imagine, if the ratio becomes 40% rural and 60% urban.. it will lead to societal collapse..

You will face the consequences very soon, where you will have only monocrops produced largely, with pesticides and chemicals applied heavily.. you will have colourful food in the market, but you will never have a quality food..

Today, the food prices are very low, when we compare to the amount of hardwork a famer puts in.. you urban people are actually eating on the blood of the farmer, because, you value the food by money, without even knowing how much difficult it is to grow that..

And then you exhibit so much contempt for the farmers..

Try to come out of the westernised mindset and think independantly..

Right Angle said...

ITs not majority of hindus are ignorant.. but majority of so called hindu intellectuals who are ignorant.. the normal hindus who live in rural side are very clear in their religion.. they worship their kula deivam, and follow the community tradition..
It is the urban people, who became cultural refugees and became religious orphans, who are extremely confused to what they should follow...

Please stop this contempt for rural india, and stop this craze for westernised urbansystem..

Already, the metros had polluted our lands and rivers. Delhi and agra had converted yamuna in to a sewage. so as many cities in other places.

Each and every new city dump their sewage either in river, or in the nearby rural villages, which pollutes their ground water, unable even to live there.. I have seen that directly, where the town municipality diverted the sewage to villages in outskirts of the town, and the entire surrounding of around 10 villages had been affected, where the sewage spoilt their land, and pollutes their well..

as the sewage mixes with ground water table, the damage is felt even few 10's of kms away, where the quality of water changes..

Is this the kind of urbanisation that you are craving for?

By having contempt for rural india, your own urban life runs on the back of the rural india.. 30 years before, the urban population is less, and hence the large rural population could bear this burden..

Today, the urban population has doubles and rural population dwindling, and the rural people are unable to bear this burden..

Understand that the western urban centers are NOT the same as indian nagaras.. DO you know how the vijayanagara city which span around 400 sq.km existed? No.. right?

Is it not you are ignorant?

Harish said...

You are not listening but prattling on about things which I have not said.

Where did I display contempt for villagers?

You seem to have some sort of persecution complex.

The laws of economics are IMMUTABLE. Whether Japan, HK, Singapore or any other country that industrializes becomes more urban and less dependent on farming. This is the trend even in the Hindu island of Bali, farming contributes less and less share of the GDP as the area becomes more affluent and people move away from villages.

Recognizing this reality is not diplaying any "contempt".

Hey why don't you show me a single first world country where the majority of people still farm. Surely that would be quiet a big support for your viewpoint wouldn't it?

You can't because there are NONE and its because none of them could overcome the laws of economics.

Of course India is a third world country, there is a reason millions of Indians emigrated to the US, UK, Canada etc and want to do so. You won't find many Singaporeans (including the Singapore Tamils) lining up to come back to India.

Once again you seem to read things which I never said with your "kula deivam" claims. I said "majority of Hindus" meaning irrespective of rural or urban and that remains true. Majority of rural Hindus AND urban Hindus are utterly ignorant of Islam, Christianity and their designs. Worshipping Mariamman devotedly cannot compensate for the fact that these same people will sing "ishwar allah tere naam" the next day.

By the way for your claims that urban India lives on the "blood" of rural areas, do you realize that almost all the great technological breakthrough's of the last century that ensured we had a life expectancy above 30 happened in urban centres?

Rural peoples use electricity, cell phones, telephones and nowadays the internet don't they?

They all didn't materialize out of thin air so don't act like its a oneway street.

And the people who move away to cities come from rural areas themselves, no one is forcing them to move. They move away for a better livelihood, so you saying things like "rushing" its insulting to their intelligence. Most don't like moving away from their villages but do so because they have no choices and because they want a better livelihood where their children aren't malnourished.

During this golden age of yours where "80% were producing their own food" we had more of the population in poverty, more people starving, less overall life expectancy. You are welcome to go look at the census stats for 1991 and compare these things like life expectancy etc to today.

As for your other points about pollution of Yamuna, again please read about how Indian cities are managed under socialism to understand why that happens. Notice that you don't see the same things in London, NY, Singapore, Tokyo or countless other cities. Maybe just maybe there is something wrong with the Indian political system instead of something intrinsically wrong with urbanization itself, ever thought of that?

We had great cities in the past you know, Vijayanagara you may have heard of it. They didn't go destroy any rivers.

Arvind said...

Right Angle,

I agree with Harish. Americans have got it right and is perhaps the only major country to have got it right. All others blindly ape the Europeans and have a mess on their hands. Marxism, Socialism, Keynesianism are all European idiocies.

Right Angle said...

@Harish,

The attitude that industrialised countries are first world and farming based countries are third world itself is a indication of how much contempt you have for anything rural.. its a kind of superiority complex , similar to the racism..

It is this attitude, that makes us to look down upon tribals and villagers ..

You wont accept this, but that is the fact which any one can interpret from your comments..

Next, coming to law of economics, what is the law you are saying about? Is there only one law of economics? Is economic independant of all other factors? Is economic NOT dependant on people and politics?

For your info, there are different concepts of economics, that is based on the social structure and political administration..

So please be specific instead of generic speaking..

/** Hey why don't you show me a single first world country where the majority of people still farm. Surely that would be quiet a big support for your viewpoint wouldn't it?

You can't because there are NONE and its because none of them could overcome the laws of economics.
***/

I hope, you did not know about india before british occupation.. Dharampal had done extensive study of pre-british india, and his works are compiled in to six volumes.. these are available at www.dharampal.net

also, please read "Decolonising History" by claude alvares, which is available in "The other india books"

The pre-british india is an excellent example of how a composite, self-sustaining village republics can be a basis of a first world country..

Right Angle said...

/** Of course India is a third world country, there is a reason millions of Indians emigrated to the US, UK, Canada etc and want to do so. You won't find many Singaporeans (including the Singapore Tamils) lining up to come back to India.
**/

another example of your contempt of india.. India is NOT a third world country.. but it was made in to a third world country by british exploitation.. and it was made in to a third world country by a colonial government and beurocracy and its first Prime Minister, whose policies further pushed india to third world category..

Please read the following article, that appeared in "The Atlantic" in October, 1908 .. ie, 100 years before, when gandhi was NOT on the scene..

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/print/1969/12/the-new-nationalist-movement-in-india/4893/

The native states of those times like mysore, bellary are on par with those of developed nations..

i will reproduce the quote from that article as it is..

A further answer to the assertion that India cannot govern herself—and surely one that should be conclusive—is the fact that, in parts, she is governing herself now, and governing herself well. It is notorious that the very best government in India to-day is not that carried on by the British, but that of several of the native states, notably Baroda and Mysore. In these states, particularly Baroda, the people are more free, more prosperous, more contented, and are making more progress, than in any other part of India. Note the superiority of both these states in the important matter of popular education. Mysore is spending on education more than three times as much per capita as is British India, while Baroda has made her education free and compulsory. Both of these states, but especially Baroda, which has thus placed herself in line with the leading nations of Europe and America by making provision for the education of all her children, may well be contrasted with British India, which provides education, even of the poorest kind, for only one boy in ten and one girl in one hundred and forty-four.


Today, the american capitalism rules roost over everything, and the propoganda was such immense that people like you could not even like to think of any other alternative..

Today, the best innovations had happened NOT in america, but in Europe, and mostly in countries like sweden and other countries with traditional setup.. I request you to take a study of those..

Right Angle said...

/** By the way for your claims that urban India lives on the "blood" of rural areas, do you realize that almost all the great technological breakthrough's of the last century that ensured we had a life expectancy above 30 happened in urban centres?

Rural peoples use electricity, cell phones, telephones and nowadays the internet don't they?
***/

The technological breakthrough has nothing to do with urban or rural.. the issue is how urban people suck the blood of rural people for their very life style..

the power plants are located at rural area displacing the rural people.. the coal mines are located at rural areas, displacing the rural people.. the iron ores are located at tribal lands, and the government just drives away and exploits the resources for the urban people..

next let me come to the urban life style.. the sewages that cities produce, are drained in to the rural villages on the outskirts of the cities.. depending on the size of the city, the number of villages affected is large.. for eg, in chennai, almost all rivers are converted in sewage, just because of urbanisation.. the seashore is polluted, and contaminated with continuous drainage of these sewage..

The more severe is the case with cities of interior.. The Delhi had made yamuna a sewage.. the calcutta, bangalore, Pune etc etc..

Next, coming to the price of essential commodoties.. are you saying the law of economics applies here.. when the price of milk increases the government steps and controls the price.. when the price of onion, rice and other vegetables increase, the government controls it..

Your law of economics had made everything costly.. education, and medical services are one of essential ones.. but your law of economics had made these essential services too costly..

Even a middle class people in cities cannot bear this cost.. how can the rural people, whose produces are always kept at low prices by government bear?

Right Angle said...

/** And the people who move away to cities come from rural areas themselves, no one is forcing them to move. They move away for a better livelihood, so you saying things like "rushing" its insulting to their intelligence. Most don't like moving away from their villages but do so because they have no choices and because they want a better livelihood where their children aren't malnourished.
**/

Nothing is farther from truth like this.. do you know why villagers have no choices?

Because their village autonomy is snatched by the government. The traditional administrative setup of villages are completely ignored, neglected, and allowed to degrade.. the power to collect taxes, renovate ponds and make developmental activities for the villages had been denied.

Jawaharlal nehru, the first PM, ruled india for 20 years, and he started the urbanisation policy alloting all funds to urban centres, depriving rural villages. The trend continued for another 20 years of his rule and then nothing much changed by the successive government. When rajiv gandhi took over, he too were obsessed with urbanisation, and the villages were continuously neglected for 200 years. (yes.including britishers)..

When the villagers are denied autonomy, power to regulate themselves, and denied cash for developing their region, what choice will they have, except to become refugees at urban centre?

and you claim they are not forced and they come out of their own wish.. do you have conscience in you?

Even now, india is 60% villages, and you never speak of developing villages.. you are hell bent in destroying villages and pushing everyone to cities.. it is the same attitude exhibited by the centre..

Release the villages from the clutches of the government control, give them autonomy, the power to administer themselves.. i am sure, there will be reverse migration as it is happening in gujarat..

/** During this golden age of yours where "80% were producing their own food" we had more of the population in poverty, more people starving, less overall life expectancy. You are welcome to go look at the census stats for 1991 and compare these things like life expectancy etc to today.
**/

Rural villagers doesnt always mean poverty.. poverty is NOT absense of money.. but absense of means of survival..
as said above, the villagers were kept as slaves to the central government, which did not allocate any funds for even maintaining the existing infrastructure.. the villagers did not have any say in the village administration..

It is a miracle that inspite of all these government oppression, villages continued to survive..

It is a pity, that policies for farming, and villages are taken by those people, who never have idea of what villages are.. Does the government ask the villagers what they want?

Please read dharampal's book at www.dharampal.net to understand more about poverty or the villages..

/** As for your other points about pollution of Yamuna, again please read about how Indian cities are managed under socialism to understand why that happens
**/

What ever it may be.. today, the urbanites are polluting so many villages for their lavish luxury life style.. i am not talking about socialism or capitalism.. it is you people who are sucking the villagers blood.. accept this reality and take corrective steps from your end..

Even Newyork or London, they carry their sewage and pollute the sea at distance..

In case of our vijyanagara type of cities, i request you to study their architecture and you will understand the concept of cities more.. without knowing anything of those, its not logical to come to pre-mature conclusion as you have done before..

Hope, you would atleast open your minds for alternate ideas..

Right Angle said...

/** And the people who move away to cities come from rural areas themselves, no one is forcing them to move. They move away for a better livelihood, so you saying things like "rushing" its insulting to their intelligence. Most don't like moving away from their villages but do so because they have no choices and because they want a better livelihood where their children aren't malnourished.
**/

Nothing is farther from truth like this.. do you know why villagers have no choices?

Because their village autonomy is snatched by the government. The traditional administrative setup of villages are completely ignored, neglected, and allowed to degrade.. the power to collect taxes, renovate ponds and make developmental activities for the villages had been denied.

Jawaharlal nehru, the first PM, ruled india for 20 years, and he started the urbanisation policy alloting all funds to urban centres, depriving rural villages. The trend continued for another 20 years of his rule and then nothing much changed by the successive government. When rajiv gandhi took over, he too were obsessed with urbanisation, and the villages were continuously neglected for 200 years. (yes.including britishers)..

When the villagers are denied autonomy, power to regulate themselves, and denied cash for developing their region, what choice will they have, except to become refugees at urban centre?

and you claim they are not forced and they come out of their own wish.. do you have conscience in you?

Even now, india is 60% villages, and you never speak of developing villages.. you are hell bent in destroying villages and pushing everyone to cities.. it is the same attitude exhibited by the centre..

Release the villages from the clutches of the government control, give them autonomy, the power to administer themselves.. i am sure, there will be reverse migration as it is happening in gujarat..

/** During this golden age of yours where "80% were producing their own food" we had more of the population in poverty, more people starving, less overall life expectancy. You are welcome to go look at the census stats for 1991 and compare these things like life expectancy etc to today.
**/

Rural villagers doesnt always mean poverty.. poverty is NOT absense of money.. but absense of means of survival..
as said above, the villagers were kept as slaves to the central government, which did not allocate any funds for even maintaining the existing infrastructure.. the villagers did not have any say in the village administration..

It is a miracle that inspite of all these government oppression, villages continued to survive..

It is a pity, that policies for farming, and villages are taken by those people, who never have idea of what villages are.. Does the government ask the villagers what they want?

Please read dharampal's book at www.dharampal.net to understand more about poverty or the villages..

Harish said...

lol stating that India is a third world country is "racism" now.

You don't see millions of malnourished people in Japan nor do you see streets filled with beggars and people picking through trash there. Hmm wonder why that is...

Must be a big Japanese conspiracy no?

Too bad the Japanese lacked visionary leaders like yourself who would keep everyman in the field plowing using a bull and growing his own food. Too bad they aspired above that and are building robots, just scandalous isn't it?

How dare these idiotic Japs not know that the best life for the people is for everyone to go live in a village and farm.

Yes there are immutable laws of economics, go take an economics class. I can't spoonfeed you everything.

"I hope, you did not know about india before british occupation.. Dharampal had done extensive study of pre-british india, and his works are compiled in to six volumes.. these are available at www.dharampal.net"

What does that have to do with what I asked you to show?

I asked you to show me a single first world country where the majority still farm. Instead you give me a link to Dharampal's study of India 2 centuries ago. Well newsflash, back then all the other countries including UK had the majority of people farming. This was before the steam engine and agriculture was labour intensive.

In many ways you remind me of the Luddites and Gandhi himself with his charkha mania.

"(A disciple:) He has criticized the Arya Samaj also.

Yes, he has criticized Dayananda Saraswati who has, according to him, abolished image-worship and set up the idolatry of the Vedas. He forgets, I am afraid, that he is doing the same in economics by his Charkha and Khaddar, and, if one may add, by his idolatry of non-violence in religion and philosophy.

http://www.voiceofdharma.com/books/ir/IR_part3.htm"

"He made Charkha a religious article of faith and excluded all people from Congress membership who could not spin. How many even among his own followers believe in his gospel of Charkha? Such a tremendous waste of energy just for the sake of a few annas is most unreasonable.

Give [people] education, technical training and give them the fundamental organic principles of organization, not on political but on business lines. But Gandhi does not want such industrial organization, he is for going back to the old system of civilization, and so he comes in with his magical formula “Spin, spin, spin.” C. R. Das and a few others could act as a counterbalance. It is all a fetish.

http://voiceofdharma.com/books/ir/IR_part5.htm"

You can go farm with a bull and only use a bullock cart like our ancestors used to but the man who uses a tractor will beat you.

What requires hundreds of labourers to harvest in India is harvested by a single farmer in Japan because of TECHNOLOGY.

You are like the cavalryman in the military crying incessantly that your role is now obsolete. Cavalry became obsolete in modern warfare once again because of TECHNOLOGY, but with visionary leaders like you I am sure we can resurrect it along with bows and arrows for the Indian army. How dare the Indian military abolish an entire subdivision of the military which was a crucial part of warfare for centuries?

What a blow to the castes which used to produce excellent cavalrymen, surely we must bring back horse borne cavalry and mahouts with their elephants when India is at war to save the livelihoods of these groups.

Earlier the charioteer must have also cried that chariots were becoming obsolete in war by 400 BCE but the world went on just as India will go on when the majority of people no longer farm.

I can't debate with the wilfully blind, especially one who is totally ignorant of economics, so consider this my last reply.

Right Angle said...

/** "I hope, you did not know about india before british occupation.. Dharampal had done extensive study of pre-british india, and his works are compiled in to six volumes.. these are available at www.dharampal.net"

What does that have to do with what I asked you to show?

I asked you to show me a single first world country where the majority still farm. Instead you give me a link to Dharampal's study of India 2 centuries ago. Well newsflash, back then all the other countries including UK had the majority of people farming. This was before the steam engine and agriculture was labour intensive.
**/


For most of your questions, the answer lies in dharampal's works.. without reading it, you are continuously bouncing on me..

What can i say?

So, you are NOT ready to face any alternate views, and in turn want to establish your own views as true..

For the moment, let my views be backward, ignorant and whatever you call.. but do you have that openness to read about dharampal;s works.. dharampal had spent more than 40 years of his life, researching in to india, from the accounts of various european archives..

I will answer you, only if you are open enough..

If you want to believe in your own views, i have no problem.. if you want to learn more, pls read dharampals books.. wwww.dharampal.net

Right Angle said...

/** You don't see millions of malnourished people in Japan nor do you see streets filled with beggars and people picking through trash there. Hmm wonder why that is...
**/

ha.. you are talking about malnourished people.. pls tell me, whether nourishment comes from industries and IT parks?

Every nutrition, and food for man comes from nature and farming.. Majority of people in india once grow their food, raise cattle, and feed well for themselves.. Do you know there were more than 1000's of varieties of rice in india, which was suitable to the region they grow.. do you know there are so many food products, right from pulses to cereas were grown. do you know people had variety of options to food, incase rice failed.. Do you know, we had an efficiently developed rain fed farming process, where millets are grown by correctly sowing it according to the rain patterns?

In the name of science, everything is collapsed.. and now after making india thirdworld, you are abusing the villagers who are victims..

There are malnourished people because, people like you from westernised urban centers collapsed the entire farming community.. the farmers who grew food for their survival is diverted to frow sugarcane for corporates, cotton for large textile mills and other cash crops.. the food cycle got entirely collapsed.. The village autonamy is snatched by urbanites like you, and farmers who earlier had a village panchayat chief for support is now left with no one..

The panchayat system was collapsed, and in place of panchayat leader, a village administrative officer is posted, who is answerable only to government and not to the villagers.. as a result, the villagers right from farmers to labouers have to beg everything to this officers, who do not have the authority or power to administer the village..

Its you people the culprit who is responsible for malnutrition of those numerous refugees, who were virtually driven out of their habitat, by your government..



/** I asked you to show me a single first world country where the majority still farm. Instead you give me a link to Dharampal's study of India
**/

First define what is meant by a first world country..

/** 2 centuries ago. Well newsflash, back then all the other countries including UK had the majority of people farming. This was before the steam engine and agriculture was labour intensive.
**/

Centuries back, there was a vast land of india for the britishers to loot, and hence theose people left farming to get a share of pie in the collective loot that british made..

Can we do that?

/** I am afraid, that he is doing the same in economics by his Charkha and Khaddar, and, if one may add, by his idolatry of non-violence in religion and philosophy
**/

Gandhi's chakra is a symbolism which later went to iconism.. You first study, what made gandhi to adopt chakra? You will come to understand the grim situation at that time..
The native textile industry is systematically destroyed, by denying raw cotton, and by dumping mass produced textiles..

Right Angle said...

/** You can go farm with a bull and only use a bullock cart like our ancestors used to but the man who uses a tractor will beat you.

What requires hundreds of labourers to harvest in India is harvested by a single farmer in Japan because of TECHNOLOGY.
**/

First tell me what level of knowledge do you have about farming except for output and productivity?

Do you know the role of bulls, and the purpose behind it? Do you know how different entities of farming are interdependant, contributing to the food production?

I am not averse to technology.. but to a blind imitation of other countries.. please put a full stop this nehruvian idiocracy..

/** You are like the cavalryman in the military crying incessantly that your role is now obsolete. Cavalry became obsolete in modern warfare once again because of TECHNOLOGY, but with visionary leaders like you I am sure we can resurrect it along with bows and arrows for the Indian army. How dare the Indian military abolish an entire subdivision of the military which was a crucial part of warfare for centuries?
**/

Once again the ignorance.. read the indian history and you will know when canons were used, and how we responded to technology in our own way..

Your example doesnt have anything to do with farming.. We can have have AK47, cannon, airforce, missiles.. but still we F**k the same way as our iron age man does.. We eat through mouth, and shit through back.. whatever technology you bring, the plant grows in the soil and depends on nature..

You are blind about technology.. Technology and process should empower us and enhance the current process... it should not destroy the society..

I think you should be from a corporate world.. Imagine, just because some other company follows a different process efficiently, if we implement the same blindly in our company, the whole things will be messed up..

The same logic applies every where..

I can explain that, but as long as you people stop showing colonial exploitative highhanded mindset, there is no use in it..