Sunday, February 28, 2016

my firstpost piece on how to fend off the fierce assaults on india

Quick notes: PC in trouble, Subsidy burden...

Saturday, February 27, 2016

Fwd: Why I believe JNU row is Modi's Godhra-2

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: S G Naravane

Why I believe JNU row is Modi's Godhra-2
BJP and Sangh Parivar are set to benefit politically from the controversy.
Preview by Yahoo
BJP and Sangh Parivar are set to benefit politically from the controversy.

Astrologers are almost unanimous in predicting that Prime Minister Narendra Modi will come back to power in 2019, even after the BJP's defeats in Delhi and Bihar and a possible bad show in the coming state elections. Most of them make the same prediction: his stars are such that even if he is written off by one and all, he will bounce back with a bang and his rivals will be his biggest helpers.
I know two of his astrologers well - Mumbai-based Niranjan Shukla, a professional astrologer who predicted about Modi and BJP president Amit Shah with pinpoint accuracy in the past when their chips were totally down, and Amita Roy, a historian-cum-astrologer also based in Mumbai.
Only time will tell whether the BJP government will return to power at the Centre in the 2019 general elections or not. In the past though, astrological predictions about Modi, particularly his ability to bounce back from difficult situations, have invariably come true.
When 59 people, most of them Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) kar sevaks, were killed by a Muslim mob in a train near the Godhra railway station on February 27, 2002, the instant feeling in the Sangh Parivar was that it had suffered a political setback as killing of such a large number of Hindus by Muslims in a state ruled by the right-wing virtually meant the BJP's downfall.
Little did it know that its ideological rivals, the leftist NGOs and human rights activists and the Congress, would turn out to be the biggest contributors to its political resurgence.
These NGOs and the Congress launched a campaign in 2002 seeking justice for the hapless Muslims killed in the Gujarat riots, but at the same time committed the blunder of protecting, from behind the scene, the Muslim killers of Godhra whose act had actually triggered the bloodshed. Hence, a wave a repulsion exploded against the leftist activists.
Modi, on his part, played his cards well. While addressing a public gathering, he struck a balancing note saying what happened in Godhra was condemnable and what happened after Godhra was also condemnable. This was in sharp contrast to the one-sided approach of the so-called human rights activists.
And from then onwards, the more the NGOs indulged in pro-minority acts to put Modi down, including playing up fake encounter cases, the greater was the benefit that Modi derived. Modi might claim that his development plank made him the prime minister, but his image of a Hindu victim of an alleged Left and minority conspiracy also played a big role in it.
... deleted

Fwd: Ishrat Case Proves How Gandhis Were Spooked By The Rise Of One Man: Modi

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: S G Naravane

Preview by Yahoo
Former Home Secretary GK Pillai's admission on Times Now - that an affidavit filed in the alleged "fake encounter" in Gujarat that killed four Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) terrorists, including Ishrat Jahan, was deliberately changed under political direction to omit mention of their LeT affiliation - has set the cat among the pigeons.
Since this allegation has more or less been admitted by P Chidambaram in an interview to NDTV, it shows the extent to which the Gandhi family saw Narendra Modi as a clear threat to its political domination even as early as 2009 (or even earlier), when the Congress party had just trounced the BJP in the general elections.Chidambaram told NDTV: "The original affidavit did say that A, B, C, D were terrorists, but the IB's position was we don't name or charge anyone as terrorists... therefore a second affidavit had to be filed to clarify (that)," and that he "owned the decision" to file the second affidavit. (Read here). 
What is shocking is not merely that the affidavit was changed, but it was changed in a way that made threats to national security secondary to the political interests of the Gandhi dynasty, Sonia and Rahul.
The change in the affidavit was wrong in principle for two reasons, even though it is fair to claim that details about the affiliation of those killed by the Gujarat police were not as important as the charge that they were killed in a "fake encounter".
First, who is being killed is not immaterial to how the fake encounter case is finally decided – especially if it leads to conviction. As an analogy, let's assume a woman is being prosecuted for the murder of her husband. Is it immaterial to let the court know that she was beaten daily and that may be the cause that led to her murdering her husband, assuming it is all provable? Similarly, in a "fake encounter", who was killed is not an insignificant fact. The court can show leniency even if there is a conviction if it was clear that the persons killed were threats to national security.
Second, if Pillai is to be believed, there seems to have been wilful suppression of important national security aspects of the operation, Till the affidavit was changed, the Ishrat-LeT case was considered a successful Intelligence Bureau (IB) operation to lure and trap LeT terrorists, but this success was sacrificed and converted to criminality for political expediency, leading the UPA to finally target even the IB officer involved in the operation as an accused. If the country's intelligence resources are to be compromised so casually for political purposes, the Gandhi family – or the persons acting in their interest – can indirectly be accused of sacrificing national interest in the pursuit of their political enemies.
In fact, that is really the point of this article. That the Gandhi-led UPA put an enormous amount of state and party resources to ensure that one man – Narendra Modi – was nailed and prevented from posing a challenge to the family's political dominance, and the Ishrat Jahan affidavit change was only the most diabolical of those moves.
That various non-governmental organisations, the courts and even individual journalists helped in this endeavour shows how the eco-system created by the Congress-Left political forces acts to support the dynasty's interests.
... deleted

Fwd: Swarajya Conversations: Sanjeev Sanyal On Global Economic Trends And India’s Challenges

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: S G Naravane

Swarajya Conversations: Sanjeev Sanyal On Global Econom...
Watch the full video of our first Conversations
Preview by Yahoo
'Swarajya Conversations' is a brand new series of events which will consist of a 60 minute tête-à-tête between a distinguished guest and our host. Conversations will feature thought provoking discussions with some of India's leading thinkers, economists, technologists, business leaders and figures in public life.
The first Swarajya Conversations event was held in Chennai on the 9th of February 2016. The speaker was Sanjeev Sanyal a historian, urban designer and an economist. Sanjeev Sanyal is one of Asia's leading economists, best-selling author of Land of the Seven Rivers: A Brief History of India's Geography, Eisenhower Fellow and Rhodes Scholar,
Chandu Nair hosted the event. Chandu Nair is the co-founder of Scope e-Knowledge Center, a pioneering knowledge process outsourcing company that scaled up to 1000+ people before his exit, his areas of focus were business development and fund raising, and his passion was enterprise building and transformation.
The subject was, "On Global Economic Trends And India's Challenges".
Discussing a wide range of topics in economics, Sanjeev Sanyal spoke at length about the China factor in the global economy, the downstream effect of the Chinese slowdown and how the country would deploy the excess capital it accumulates. He also spoke at length about demographics and explained how many of us may end up working well into our 70s. The discussion also veered into how India's cities must be organised to capitalise on the new knowledge economy.
Towards the later part of the the discussion Sanjeev Sanyal dwelt on the Arthashastra and Ashoka's Edicts and how King Ashoka was 'anti-Kautilyan' in many ways. Sanyal, a firm believer in a 'Chanakyan State' spoke about how a strong and a limited state is important. He explained how modern Leftists have appropriated the Ashokan ideal of a nanny state to give legitimacy for their welfare state rather than adopt the Kautilyan model .
The last few minutes were spent on discussing 'complex adaptive systems' in which a large number of independent or semi independent agents are continuously interacting with each other and are adapting to the existing system. Examples of cities, businesses and cultures were cited. A short Q&A session with the audience brought the event to an end.
Published at Today, 2 hours ago

sent from samsung galaxy note3 neo, so please excuse brevity

Paid for by your friendly neighborhood soul harverter

In a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, 34 US lawmakers have expressed “grave concerns” over “increasing intolerance and violence” against members of minority communities in India.

It refers to a June 2014 ban on “non-Hindu religious propaganda, prayers, and speeches” in their communities imposed by 50 village councils in Bastar, Chattisgarh, which it says has effectively “criminalized the practice of Christianity for an estimated 300 Christian families in the region”.

The letter then said the “nearly country-wide beef ban is increasing tensions and encouraging vigilante violence against the Indian Muslim community”.

It went on to cite the death of two Sikh men in October during protests over the desecration of the religion’s holy book, Sri Guru Granth Sahib.

..Really? How many Sikhs died due to hate crime in the US in recent years.

Concerted campaign by Breaking India forces.

Friday, February 26, 2016

Quick notes: S-Curve, Ageing Japan...

  • S-Curve: Bloomberg predicts explosive growth of EVs and resultant oil crash. 

  • Japan now has million fewer people than in 2010: The rapidly ageing population has contributed to a stagnating economy and worries of increasing health costs.

  • “It was a political decision”: Ex-home secy GK Pillai distances self from Ishrat affidavits 

  • Is Kannur, India's political murder capital? "The CPI-M leaders are in real life not pro-poor. They fight against foreign universities coming to Kerala, but they send their children to study abroad. They fought against self-financing colleges. Now the CPI-M is the largest owner of self-financing colleges in Kerala. The rank and file understand this."

NJ Governor Christie Endorses Trump

In a surprise move, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has given a ringing endorsement of Donald Trump for President. This is comparable to Jaitley endorsing Modi for PM. Trump now goes into the main Republican electoral contest (SuperTuesday) with huge momentum over that of his rivals, and as a strong favorite to win the party nomination.

Indeed, Trump may be about to do a Modi:

Thursday, February 25, 2016

my firstpost piece on the fake #JNU outrage: sedition is treason anywhere

jay bhattacharjee on Barkha Dutt's track-record during the Kargil war - a letter to Gen. VP Malik

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jay Bhattacharjee


Since Ms. Dutt has written a highly egregious and provocative "open letter" to the PM  with her pet 
peeves about secularism, intolerance of the "majority" etc., I was compelled to try and bring down this 
god-awful poseur a few notches. Therefore, I wrote an open letter to Gen. VP Mailk, COAS during the
Kargil war, to clarify the allegations about Dutt's extremely dubious conduct  while covering the war. 

My essay has just been published.

Jay Bhattacharjee
Jay Bhattacharjee MA(Cantab), FCS
Advisor (Corporate Laws & Finance)


sent from samsung galaxy note3 neo, so please excuse brevity

Fwd: U.S. can ill afford 2 COLD WARS+PAMPORE TERRORIST ATTACK – ‘A Special Kind of Failure’+Nurturing Capital Acquisitions+South China Sea patrols brings no benefit to India

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sanjeev Nayyar

1. Cosying up to Sri Lanka by G Parthasarathy 25.2.16 
The growing Chinese interest in port facilities in Sri Lanka and the offer by Pakistan to supply Sri Lanka Chinese designed JF 17 fighter aircraft at favourable terms, suggests the emergence of the joint China-Pakistan axis to establish a cooperative defence network, across the Indian Ocean.
Sri Lanka appears determined to go ahead with the Colombo Port City Project with China, though it is likely to have the terms amended to address concerns of its other partners. '
2. Pakistan Army provide weapons training to the ISIS in Afghanistan by vikram sood 25.2.16
3. PAMPORE TERRORIST ATTACK – 'A Special Kind of Failure' 24.2.16 by Manvendra Sinh:
In a hostage situation, time is essential as delay means deaths. But in Pampore, an assault was ordered before it was clear whether there were hostages, where they were, and how many terrorists held them. Because Pampore is Srinagar and a multistorey government building meant the exigency was getting the hostages out fast.
So, let them adapt, find the route, even if it is not a 'fair' one. At least precious lives wouldn't have been lost, for the sake of time, which in the end doesn't tell. Only statistics do. And in that the army botched up. Badly.
4. Army Deployment Why this goof up in Haryana 26.2.16
'Under no circumstance can the Army be placed under the command of the police. This is an essential part of fair civil administration because the Army is expected to be totally impartial and unprejudiced while dealing with an explosive law and order situation, which might have arisen because of excess committed by the police resulting in a head-on confrontation with the rioting public. Neither is there any provision for "bulk requisitioning" of the Army by the Chief Secretary or the Chief Minister directly dealing with the Army Chief or the Defence Minister. '
5. Pathankot Pampore and Indo Pak Talks by Lt Gen Prakash Katoch 25.2.16
My take – There is nothing to talk with Pakistan yet keep on talking knowing its futility. BJP can stop being defensive and quietly take the battle into Pakistan camp.
7. Veer Savarkar breathed his last on 26th Feb. Read 50 years on: Who was the real Savarkar 26.2.16 by Lt Gen Ashok Joshi and Col Anil Athale
My take – must read. Wish the respected authors had included Savarkar's thoughts on foreign policy esp China.
8. Autonomy for universities does not make them liberated zones by Swapan Dasgupta 26.2.16
It is instructive to recall that in the 1970s, the hostels of Jadavpur became armed fortresses, with Naxalites calling the shots. It was also the campus where the vice-chancellor was hacked to death by students proclaiming "China's chairman is our Chairman".
9. U.S. can ill afford 2 COLD WARS 25.2.16 by Dr Subhash kapila
10. South China Sea patrols brings no benefit to India 25.2.16
"Even though New Delhi obeys Washington, it's not likely that it will see the desired return. The White House's sale of fighter planes to Pakistan provides the latest example. India once mulled over deepening its military cooperation with the US in hope that the latter would cancel the endorsement for its perennial regional rival. But the US has its strategic needs by the sale of weapons and has never changed minds despite India's long-running objection.
In economy, politics and security, China is far more capable of making trouble for India than the reverse. The Modi government's refusal to launch the joint naval patrols shows that it has no attempt to provoke China on the one hand and that its ties with the US are not firm enough on the other".
12. Manipur likely to lose land to Myanmar 26.2.16
Warm Regards
sanjeev nayyar
to unsubscribe write back

sent from samsung galaxy note3 neo, so please excuse brevity

Fwd: On the Fiftieth Anniversary of Savarkar’s Atmarpan

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Team <>
Date: Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 7:37 AM
Subject: On the Fiftieth Anniversary of Savarkar's Atmarpan

Today, 26 February 2016 marks the fiftieth anniversary of the atmarpan of Swatantryaveer Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. The day according to the Hindu cale

savarkar header

Today, 26 February 2016 marks the fiftieth anniversary of the atmarpan of Swatantryaveer Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. The day according to the Hindu calendar was Phalgun shashthi, shaka 1887, the time was 1110 hours. Savarkar breathed his last with a sense of fulfilment of his life-mission. The Bhagwad Gita mentions that the most realised souls leave their mortal coil in Uttarayana (northward movement of the Sun), in sukla paksha (period of the waxing moon) and in daytime. A life-long practitioner of the karmayoga enunciated by the Bhagwad Gita, Savarkar did not falter in his dying moment. Throughout his life, Savarkar had several brushes with Death. Indeed, it seemed as if Death seemed reluctant to approach Savarkar. This time, it was Savarkar who embraced Death in the highest tradition of Yoga after renouncing food and then water for a full twenty-three days.

While Savarkar has left behind a huge legacy, it is his vision of India that needs to be remembered now, more than ever before. In his 1937 Presidential speech to the Hindu Mahasabha, he said," Let the Indian State be purely Indian. Let it not recognize any invidious distinctions whatsoever as regards the franchise, public services, offices, taxation on the grounds of religion and race. Let no cognizance be taken whatsoever of man being Hindu or Mohammedan, Christian or Jew. Let all citizens of that Indian State be treated according to their individual worth irrespective of their religious or racial percentage in the general population. If such an Indian State is kept in view, the Hindu Sanghatanists will, in the interest of Hindu Sangathan itself, be the first to offer their whole-hearted loyalty to it. I for one and thousands of the Mahasabhaites like me have set this ideal of an Indian State as our political goal ever since the beginning of our political career and shall continue to work for its consummation to the end of our life"

Savarkar's vision of India was modern and forward-looking. At a time when scientific temper was given short shrift, it was Savarkar who wrote pro-science essays. At a time when woolly-headed ideas of non-violence ruled the roost, it was Savarkar who fearlessly propounded the eternal truth that 'limited non-violence is virtue, absolute non-violence is sin'. Savarkar was one of the few Indian leaders who had clear ideas about the defence needs of India. At a time when ideas of class conflict were in vogue, it was Savarkar who articulated an economic theory based on national co-ordination of class interests. At a time, when industrialization was considered as a modern-day evil, it was Savarkar who embraced mechanization and industrialization. At a time when foreign policy was sought to be built on platitudes, it was Savarkar who brought a sense of realism by stating that foreign policy is and ought to be guided by national interest.

Not popularity but public interest alone guided Savarkar's thought and action. A resurgent Hindu society should now embrace Savarkar's message in its entirety.

On this fiftieth anniversary of Savarkar's atmarpan, we pledge to promote his legacy. Team.

facebook twitter
©2016 | Pune, India.
Web Version   Forward   Unsubscribe  

sent from samsung galaxy note3 neo, so please excuse brevity

Wednesday, February 24, 2016

US Blocks Modi's Solar Initiative Via WTO

A WTO ruling on a complaint filed by the US has struck down the Modi govt's new solar power initiative, on the grounds that its local content quota requirement is protectionist:

Quick notes: Lying press, E-scooter...

  • Lying Press: Germans Lose Faith in the Fourth Estate. The media had long concealed the extent of crimes committed by refugees and migrants.

    ....In fact, the media and govt tried (
    unsuccessfully) to find any German perpetrators in the Cologne assaults so that they could gloat, "See? This is widespread crime. It is racist to blame the refugees".

  • Flipkart-backed Ather unveils e-scooter: Eyeing e-car segment next.

  • Bullet Train Syndrome: The bullet train syndrome perpetuates an elitist approach to the Indian Railways, which consists of creating a pleasant fast track for a privileged minority at the cost of slumdog treatment for the rest.

  • Poop Transplant: A solution to one of the world’s biggest health problems could be fecal pills

  • Barley 'reduces appetite and improves metabolism': Incorporating barley into the diet reduces the risk of diabetes and lowers blood sugar levels.

Tuesday, February 23, 2016

Boston Dynamics Unveils Latest Atlas Robot

Google-owned robotics company Boston Dynamics has unveiled the newest iteration of its bipedal Atlas robot:

As you can see, the thing has been improved by incorporating an onboard power supply, as compared to the previous one walking with a long power cord trailing behind it. The first Atlas was only created a couple of years ago, so at this rate of improvement these increasingly humanoid machines should be approaching human-levels of agility and capability within 10 years time.

As with Driverless Nano, India should get onboard the robotics bandwagon to develop its own human-capable robots. ISRO should even  try to put them on the Moon and Mars. While India does have a large labour pool, it's notoriously prone to strikes and agitation, while eschewing menial work. Ironically, the word "robot" originates as a Czech word meaning menial work and drudgery, like cleaning toilets.

Trump Wins Nevada

As predicted, Donald Trump has won the Nevada caucuses, in his 3rd straight win in a row:

At this rate, it will be impossible to prevent him from becoming the Republican nominee, because he'll have the required number of delegates.

It's also worth mentioning that Trump has garnered 46% of the Hispanic vote, which shows that his frank talk on border security is helping rather than hurting him.

Monday, February 22, 2016

Quick notes: Kaangress games, Urdu in Pakistan...

Fwd: Selection Engineering: Political Filters in JNU’s Admission Process

awesome. nice work by arvind, digging up this dirt.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Arvind Kumar
Selection Engineering: Political Filters in JNU's Admission Process

The problem at JNU needs to be fixed and the grip of Communists over the university must be destroyed, but this has not happened for multiple reasons.' Commentary | 23-02-2016

[Warning: What you are about to read is not satire. The questions that appear in this article are taken from actual question papers of the Jawaharlal Nehru University. Some readers may find the contents of this article disturbing and it may evoke extreme anger at those in charge of the university as well as the politicians of the ruling party for their inaction. Reader discretion is advised.]

How does Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) ensure that it remains an anti-India bastion that churns out graduates who hate India? They do this through a biased selection process and their selection bias ensures that their institutionalized hatred for Indian civilization is sustained.


As part of their selection process, JNU conducts interviews, but these interviews are conducted only for selected streams. Interviews in any field are almost always subjective and offer ample scope for manipulating the admission process. Below is a table from JNU's website which lists their admission policy to various courses.

The weightage to written and viva voce examination is given as under:

Programme Written Exam. Viva Voce
Part time (COP & Advanced Diploma in Mass Media in Urdu) 70% 30%
B.A. (Hons.) First year 100% No viva
B.A. (Hons.) Second year 70% 30%
M.A./M.Sc./MCA (except Foreign Languages) 100% No viva
M.A. (Foreign Languages) 70% 30%
M.Phil./Ph.D., M.Tech./ Ph.D., Pre-Ph.D./Ph.D., MPH/PH.D. 70% 30%

As can be seen, although there is no interview for admission to the first year of the BA (Hons.) program, they have gatekeepers to let in only selected students into the second year of the same program. JNU also conducts interviews for its M.Phil, PhD and foreign language programs as they are interested in maintaining their monopoly in those areas.

JNU additionally forces candidates who apply for admission to reveal their political positions on various issues. While the questions asked in the interviews are not available in the public realm, the questions in their written tests reveal a lot about the selection process.

For example, JNU has a field called "Discrimination and Exclusion Studies" at their School of Social Sciences. No, this is not where they teach about their own discrimination patterns such as their demand that backward caste people be excluded from the the faculty of their university.

Here is an excerpt from their argument during that controversy:

"…the chief victim will be the disadvantaged sections of Indian society. If JNU declines, the well-to-do will move to foreign and private universities, and the disadvantaged will no longer be able to get world-class education."

After all, when they do it, it doesn't count as discrimination or exclusion.

This program exists for a specific purpose which is to attack India and present the political positions of the anti-India forces. The question paper in 2015 for admission to the M.Phil and PhD programs of this field contained the following question which revealed their hand:


The efforts to internationalize the issue of caste-based discrimination… which had received a boost in 2001 at the United Nations World Conference Against Racism… suffered a serious setback at the Durban Review Conference held later… While in 2001, WCAR had discussed caste euphemistically… the Durban Review Conference (DRC) evaded even an allusion to caste.

Discuss the validity of India's official position that caste discrimination is not at par with racial discrimination.

Notice how the question wants the candidate to oppose the stance of the Indian government and foist the views of the US State Department onto India. The question helpfully informs the student of the answer when it uses words such as 'received a boost,' 'suffered a setback' and 'evaded even an allusion.'

Here is another example from the same test paper which one can argue is a harmless one as it merely tests the knowledge of current affairs, but the response to this question can be used to determine the student's political leanings when it is combined with the response to other questions.

Which of the following States has enactment of local anti-conversion law?

  1. Madhya Pradesh
  2. Orissa
  3. Arunachal Pradesh
  4. All of the above

If the candidate does not answer this question, such a candidate is high risk as he or she could be a supporter of any political party. Watch out for being ambushed in the interview! If the candidate knows the answer to the question but fails to answer any of the questions related to Communist ideology which seem to exist all over their question papers (the names of Amartya Sen and Karl Marx appear with a high frequency), you know for sure the person is not an anti-India candidate.

Here is yet another question that pushes the US State Department's narrative:

Which of the forms of exclusion most predominantly defines the conflict in North-East, Kashmir and Sri Lanka?

  1. Symbolic
  2. Ethnic
  3. Cultural
  4. Religious

Another loaded question that attacks India and is straight out of the US State Department's playbook:

"In what ways is social exclusion culturally institutionalized and naturalized in Indian society? Explain this using current intersectionality debates on gender and caste-based exclusion in India."

Maybe this could be explained using the opposition of JNU's professors who wanted to institutionalize the exclusion of the members of the backward caste from JNU? Wait, that would of course result in the student failing the test.

We now take a look at the entrance test paper from 2013 for the MA program in History.

In one of their questions, they candidly reveal their views about India.

"Nationalism creates as many problems as it solves." Discuss.

Here are a few more questions from the same paper that extract the student's opinions.

Mughal patronage to art and architecture was geared towards projecting a visual language of power. Discuss with examples.

With reference to either Buddhism or Jainism, discuss the extent to which they posed a challenge to Vedic traditions.

How far were the Bhakti Movements used as a vehicle of dissent and protest in medieval India?

What are the ways in which telegraphs, railways and canals reveal the workings of British rule in India?

The answers to these questions which would align with the Communist positions are that Mughal rulers were great people who patronized the arts, Hindu traditions were oppressive and every other tradition in India was some form of dissent against Hindus, and the British barbarism and genocides in India were good because Karl Marx said so in his article in New York Daily Tribune.

"Why do crimes against women persist in the 21st century?"

Perhaps one answer could be that it is due to people like Tarun Tejpal or Hasan Suroor who wrote for The Hindu, the Communist newspaper and who was arrested in London? Or is it because of the Communist Supreme Court judge who had to resign in disgrace after sexually harassing an intern?

The 2014 test paper in the same subject too has some interesting questions.

There is a huge passage which is really a hagiography of Nehru that masquerades as Reading Comprehension. After this hagiography, the test paper moves on and subtly evaluates the student's opinion on the topic of social engineering.


"Do you agree that the family is the fulcrum of society?"


Every Marxist knows that the party line sees the family structure as a hurdle in their pursuit of a Communist society. Students aligned with their views will therefore present negative opinions about the concept of the family. Those who aren't Communists are unlikely to have this train of thought and the examiners will know to fail them during the interview.

The paper also has some not so subtle stuff in it.

"How are gender relations reflected in the Ramayana and Mahabharata traditions?"

We already know what the JNU professors expect, but JNU would never ask a similarly worded question about the Bible or the Quran. Imagine the furore if a question in a test paper of another university read, "How are gender relations reflected in the Quran and Bible traditions?"

JNU professors would be the ones who generate a huge outcry about intolerance and this would be accompanied by accusations of hatred by Hindus. American professors too would join in as JNU is the university through which they seek to control the academic narrative in India and they would not want to lose ground that they have already gained.

The 2014 entrance test paper for admission to the Sociology program too demands that the student reveal his or her political position on the family.

"Family reproduces inequality." Elucidate your opinion with special reference to Indian society.

This is a recurring theme. The 2013 test paper for admission to the M.Phil and PhD programs in Sociology too had a similar question.


"What is the role of the family in the reproduction of inequality in India?"


Here is a question on the freedom of speech from the test paper for admission to the M.Phil and PhD programs in Political Studies.

"On what grounds do political theorists defend freedom of speech? When and under what conditions can this freedom be justifiably restricted?"

Here is the "correct" answer: When lies against India and Hindus that were manufactured by the US State Department are spread around in exchange for money received from the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation or Lannan Foundation, political theorists consider it to be freedom of speech.

On the other hand, when Hindus speak the truth about those funded by these foundations, it is intolerance and hate speech and their freedom can be justifiably restricted!

In the 2015 test paper for admission to the MA program in Political Science, immediately following the question on Karl Marx's view on private property, we have one this one:

"What is the role of extra-parliamentary mobilization in representative democracy? Substantiate your response with two concrete examples of such mobilization."

For the uninitiated, "extra-parliamentary mobilization" is their code language for a violent revolution. This question gauges the candidate's support for the violent Naxalites (Maoists, in their latest avatar) who kidnap young children and molest them.

Curiously, it is not just the JNU professors who support the violence by Naxalites. The US State Department too writes "human rights reports" in their favor and JNU professors are once again in alignment with their American masters.

Meanwhile, the test for admission to the program in Science Policy screens applicants based on their knowledge about the foot soldiers of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) when it asks about the "people's science movement" of the party:

"What is people's science movement? Analyze the role of leadership and institutions involved in this movement in India."

If you are left wondering what "Science Policy" is about, it is the field you go into if you are incapable of understanding even middle school level science but get to flaunt your intelligence in Communist circles because you are somehow associated with science.

marxIn other papers, questions related to Karl Marx and his political opinions make a frequent appearance.

Here is an example from the test paper for admission to the MA program in Sociology:

Write short notes on any three of the following.

  1. Social Mobility
  2. Marx's concept of alienation
  3. Difference between caste and tribe
  4. Human development index

The admission test for the program in Development and Labour Studies is heavy on Karl Marx and also uses phrases such as 'Surplus Value' and 'Reserve Army of Labour' while a test paper for admission to a program on Social Systems asks:

What is the Marxian notion of ideology? Compare it with Karl Mannheim's 'Sociology of Knowledge.'

Everything the JNU professors do is driven by some political agenda. Thus, instead of joining those who seek to find a solution, they even find an opportunity to blame their political opponents for the tragedies such as the suicides of poor farmers.

The 2013 test paper for admission to the M.Phil and PhD programs in Social Systems has the following question:

"Is there a relationship between neo-liberalism and farmers' suicides in India?"

(FILES) In this picture taken 25 March 1995, Sri Lankan President Chandrika Kumaratunga (L) Indian President Shankar Dayal Sharma (C) and Indian Prime Minister P.V. Narashima Rao (R) in New Delhi.   Former Indian Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao, who helped transform India's economy in the 1990s, died 23 December 2004, two weeks after suffering a heart attack, the speaker of the national parliament said. The 83-year-old who was hospitalised 08 December 2004, launched India on the path of economic reforms in 1991, having brought in the present Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to head the finance ministry.  AFP PHOTO/RAVEENDRAN/FILES

Neo-liberalism is of course their code language for economic liberalization set in motion by PV Narasimha Rao in 1991. The Communist professors also take opposing positions as and when it suits them. They direct their criticism at those who want to create a self-reliant economy but at other times they criticize the erosion of the sovereignty of the State.

Thus we have the following two questions, one from a test for admission to the Science Policy program and another from a test paper for admission to a program in Political Studies.

Do you think that self-reliance is an obsolete policy goal in the era of globalization? Critically discuss.

It has been argued that contemporary economic processes are increasingly eroding the territorial as well as the institutional sovereignty of the State. Substantiate your response to this view by drawing upon recent scholarship.

Make no mistake. These are not questions that test the student's ability to present arguments on a variety of viewpoints. That would have been a legitimate claim if these test papers contained anything other than the Communist Party's views.

Every question is based on the party line and it so happens that the Communist parties criticize the proponents of globalization while also attacking certain non-Communist critics who seek a self-reliant economy. It is these positions that are reflected in the two questions.

No reputed university will ask a student to reveal his or her political position before offering admission, yet that is exactly what JNU does. Here is one more example from their test for admission to the M.Phil program in Law and Governance.

"The idea of a secular State is enshrined in the Constitution of India and yet the meaning of secularism remains deeply contested. Take two examples of such contestations and suggest ways ahead."

Not only does this question ask for the candidate's political position, it actually asks the candidate's political position on one of the most controversial issues in India and an issue on which the professors judging the students are politically active. Such tactics amount to corruption of the process and the government should put an end to it and punish the guilty.

The faculty members at JNU are confident that they will get away with their shenanigans and view the BJP leaders as weak and ineffective people who look to the Western countries for approval.

They are so confident that even after Narendra Modi became the Prime Minister of India, the professors took a cheap shot at his political mentor L.K. Advani. In their question paper in 2015 for admission to the first year of the BA program, the first question was:

Who among the following is not a Bharat Ratna?


  • Pandit Ravi Shankar
  • Rajiv Gandhi
  • M. S. Subbulakshmi
  • L. K. Advani


These loaded questions to filter out students from getting admitted to a prominent university that receives government funding is an example of the tyranny of the minority that has the support of only two percent of the Indian population.

The problem at JNU needs to be fixed and the grip of Communists over the university must be destroyed, but this has not happened for multiple reasons.

Ordinary Indians too, are at fault for not making this happen. Instead of taking decisive action, some activists have naively advocated using "facts and logic" to persuade the other side to change their views. They use the term "intellectual kshatriya" to describe those who believe that enemies can be won over through sheer force of argument. The term "intellectual kshatriya" is merely a synonym for "drawing room politicians" and "armchair activists."

That is not how results are achieved. The swamp must be drained and the toxic sludge that has accumulated over the decades must be dredged out. After that is done, it must be replaced by something clean. The name too must be a clean one. This can only be done under the direction of a person whose career is not at stake. This means no professor or bureaucrat should head such an operation and it must happen under the direction of an activist.

Before embarking on this effort, some steps should be taken immediately. The shallowness of the existing curriculum must be exposed. The standard of foreign language courses must be raised to the level of native speakers in the country of those languages instead of permitting the students to get away with very basic proficiency. Increasing the standard will automatically result in draining some of swamp. No one will be able to oppose this step without objecting to an improvement in the quality of education.

The Act under which JNU was constituted states that the university shall "make special provision for integrated courses in humanities, science and technology." Therefore, steps must also be taken to compel students to pass advanced courses in mathematics and the sciences.

It is an open secret that Communists are terrified of mathematics and have in recent years foisted humanities subjects on the Indian Institute of Science with the aim of gaining a backdoor entry into the reputed institute. They must be shown that this game can be played both ways.

There should also be an investigation to determine if professors discriminated against students based on political views, and if so, whether the political views of such professors matched the positions of the US State Department.

If such alignment was the result of either direct or indirect payments, severe action must be taken against the erring professors. There is also a strong case for immediately approaching the courts and halting the current round of the admission process as it seems to be a corrupt one.

At the least, the interview process must be done away with and a neutral third party must be entrusted with the job of conducting the entrance tests until the swamp is cleaned up.

In the meantime, those who are interested in viewing various test papers of JNU can do so by clicking here.
FULL DISCLOSURE: The author rejected an offer of admission from JNU during his days as a student.

sent from samsung galaxy note3 neo, so please excuse brevity