What are your guys' thoughts on, or do you have any links to articles about Indian organized crime? I had a conversation with a Hindu co-worker about the invasion of the Sikh Gold Temple back in the 80s and he said it was because the Sikhs were storing drugs, guns and money there to fund the Khalistan separation movement. He went on to say that the Sikhs were the biggest gangsters in India and that's we now have Sikh gangs in Canada. I"m a pretty big fan of mafia stories but don't know much about organized crime in India, it must be pretty huge over there.

(12-13-2016 11:02 PM)scotian Wrote:  What are your guys' thoughts on, or do you have any links to articles about Indian organized crime? I had a conversation with a Hindu co-worker about the invasion of the Sikh Gold Temple back in the 80s and he said it was because the Sikhs were storing drugs, guns and money there to fund the Khalistan separation movement. He went on to say that the Sikhs were the biggest gangsters in India and that's we now have Sikh gangs in Canada. I"m a pretty big fan of mafia stories but don't know much about organized crime in India, it must be pretty huge over there.

So that is indeed the official story - Khalistan separatists keeping drugs, guns and money in the Golden Temple. No idea how true it is though. Operation Blue Star (the Indian Army extraction of the guys from the Golden Temple) was a bit of a PR disaster and that backstory may have been made up to make the government look better.

I don't know if Sikhs are really the biggest gangsters. From personal experience, Sikhs especially have a habit of playing up their own badassness. Bhangra music (heavily dominated by Sikhs) is quite often about getting bitches and shooting people. Whether they really do that stuff or are just playing wannabe gangsters is up in the air.

That said, my impression was always that the Muslim gangsters were the biggest thugs around. Dawood Ibrahim and Abu Salem come to mind.

guys, so i had my first suspension recently because of low posts count.

so at present,i am living underground so to speak.

see you soon.

Khalistanis are not Sikhs!

Sikhs do not want their separate Sikh country.

The entire Khalistan thing was an ISI hoax by Pakistan to cause internal turmoil in India. False flag!

You could argue that it was a globalist ISI/CIA plot that involved the traitorous higher ups in the Indian Government as well. The whole thing was used as an excuse by Indira Gandhi to call an Emergency, and they used it to conduct forced sterilization of poor men in Delhi under her son Sanjay Gandhi in cahoots with the IMF: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanjay_Gan...on_program

Most Indians these days don't know any of these red pills. The Indian millennials buy the secular globalist BS, and the westernized so called red pill Indian players eat up the British spread divide and conquer rhetoric about India.

Very few true nationalists left.

Jawaharlal Nehru and his entire family sold out India to the CIA linked Ford Foundation (Geithner Senior as well as Obama's mother have ties to the Ford Foundation as well) since the inception of the country, and ruined the nation by sticking with socialist policies.

Modi is the first true leader the nation has had. A bastard nation has finally found a father.

Sorry for the super long post in advance

(12-13-2016 11:12 PM)Genghis Khan Wrote:  What question do you want answered? I've gotten the impression you've moved the goal post a bit.

Your initial question: This to me implied you were asking if India could survive as a nation.
This implies a different question: Can India be successful/well-governed. Two different questions.

Thanks for the answers – I’m not at all not trying to prove you wrong in any way or discredit India, just trying to flesh out my own personal thoughts on what nationalism means for India, so the questions I'm posing are in flux. We are entering a new era in human history (the nationalism/post globalism era) and we are trying to understand how India, given its unique historical circumstances and internal diversity, fits into this. I suppose my thesis is that rising nationalist sentiment will exacerbate divisions within India rather than lead to greater national unity. This is not a commonly held view, so I haven’t tested my arguments out and I’m open to having my mind changed so I look forward to your comments.

Quote:Also, the analogy is weak: 'diversity is our strength' mantra in the West is used to import foreignerswho have nothing in common with Europeans and do not assimilate at all. Nigel Farage himself said a big reason why Brexit succeeded was because they wanted to control their own borders and immigrations. Same with the United States - the US existed with 10-15% blacks for the longest time without really affecting the nation. It's only when you start importing hordes of immigrants who refuse to assimilate do you start having trouble.

This I agree with – there will be rising anti-foreigner sentiment in India but primarily against Bangladeshi immigrants in the east. The difference though is that India, all in all, is still a source of immigration to the West, so Indians could very well get swept up in anti-immigration sentiment. How would this appear to nationalist Indians if they are lumped in with the other problem-causing migrants in Europe?

Quote:I also want to point out the flaw in your own argument: on one hand you argue India was never a nation like Spain or the UK, yet elsewhere you bring up the Catalonian, Scotish and North Ireland independence movement. Not to mention that China too for a long time consisted of warring nations. Your argument could've been used for China a long time ago too: 'China was always a bunch of kingdoms fighting with each other that the Qin Dynasty unified'. And note that China has fallen apart several times.

Hmmm, conflating two arguments here. Point one is that there are movements for regional separatism with rising nationalism, and India is not immune to these sentiments. Point two is that all of the above nations still have a core culture that has existed as contiguous political entities for hundreds of years, which India does not have. Especially China! If India, in its current state, or at least similar to its current borders, were to have the same contiguity that China had since 300 BC then I would have not bothered posting in this thread.

Quote:As I said, whether India is well-governed and whether India remains as one nation are two separate questions. Let's not confound the two

Fair point, but at some point don’t you think Indian nationalists will get frustrated with corruption and poor governance and eventually start pointing fingers, possibly leading to deep national divisions along regional and caste lines? After all, there are some provinces that are a drag on the country and others that are clearly contributing much more. Of course you can say that about many countries, but in India I think the answers could be cultural/genetic rather than due to resource disparities or favorable geography.

Quote:Also, I can't comment on the relationship between the quality of governance of India and issues regarding religion, culture, etc. The average IQ in India is 85 and that may imply poor governance even if the entire country was one monolithic cultural block. As long as that IQ number doesn't change for the better, it really doesn't matter what the ethnicities, religious and cultural breakdown of the nation is. 

Well now that the can of worms has been opened I guess I can run with it. Let’s say that significant IQ differences could be proven to exist between castes or regional groups or religions. Would the high caste groups or regions seek to separate themselves to become more prosperous without the low caste groups dragging them down?

Quote:So let's focus on your initial question of whether India can survive as a nation. Let's also clear up a second point: what time scale are we talking about? 10, 20, 50, 100, or 500 years?

I’m talking more in an abstract sense whether India has enough of a coherent identity to maintain a strong nationalist movement without it getting hijacked by divisive regional/religious/caste based interests, leading to national breakdown. No time frame, god knows what the world will look like in 100 years assuming the robots haven’t taken over.

Quote:This assumes the Muslim birthrate remains ahead of the Hindu one for a very long time. I don't know if this will be case: the gap has been closing and may be completely shut as the economy increases job and socioeconomic mobility for all:

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/Mu...336665.ece

Besides the slowing down of the Muslim birth rate, who is to say the Muslim population won't be reduced. After all, Islam hasn't been in the subcontinent for that long and right-wing Hindu organizations are actively re-converting Muslims back to their ancestors' religion of Hinduism. The numbers are pretty small though:

This is a fair point, and demographics aren’t guaranteed. I guess my main point is that if we’re going to create an Indian identity that is primarily based around Hinduism, then we’ll have to figure out whether Islam even has a role in India or whether we should just kick them out or have an Israeli type apartheid scheme. No fatalism here, just saying that we a) have to halt their growth and b) figure out to do with the ones already in India.

Quote:Maybe that's the problem - Christianity and European cultures. Western cultures have always been more result-oriented, more individualistic. The reason Europe had the Industrial Revolution and conquered the world is the same reason Europe could also not maintain unity. Be very careful to assume because European cultures couldn't co-exist in one nation, Indian cultures such as Gujaratis and Punjabis cannot either. 

You bring up a good point, perhaps the lower emphasis on individualism will help Indians get along with each other. I’m not saying it’s guaranteed that they can’t work together, but it won’t be easy, and the question is whether do they have enough in common with each other for nationalism to unite them? Perhaps in the face of Chinese or Islamic aggression or anti-white sentiment it is possible.

Quote:I never said the Indian physical types are sufficient for a national identity. Your argument was that there was too much diversity in ethnicity, religion, language etc for India to be a single nation. I said those weren't enough of a big deal to break apart the country. That is a different argument than whether ethnicity on its own is enough to sustain a national identity.

You mention the tribals, Kashmiris and orientals. However, this is similar to saying you cannot downplay the native Americans in the US. Well, the reality is these groups are a small minority. How many Nicobar Island tribals are there? Enough to resist the 250,000 numbering Border Security Force (BSF)? Highly doubt it. These small groups can agitate all they want, unless they have the physical force to break apart their feelings are irrelevant. 

This is a vastly different scenario compared to Europe where any nation can leave the EU and the EU can't do shit about it. Tribals, orientals and Kashmiris with all due respect do not remotely have the military force to break out on their own. But for argument's sake, let's say they did. So what? That's a very small part of the country and the bulk of India would still remain. And the nation of India with its currency, flag, constitution etc would remain.

Fair enough, I think I was conflating some arguments here. Hmmm, my point is rather that a) “Indian” ethnic groups encompass an extremely wide spectrum
b) Within the Indian ethnicity also includes populations that genetically match Pakistanis, Sri Lankans, and Bangladeshis.

So, Indians neither a) Have a common ethnicity nor are b) A separate ethnic group from their neighbors.

Even excluding the tribals, Asians, and Kashmiris, there is still a pretty wide spectrum among Indians in terms of skin color, temperament, and facial structure.

Pretty much all other nation states that are strongly united (except the US – though the U.S. is an immigrant nation and also going through a tramautic self reflection on national identity following the split in the alt-right so I don’t think you could point to the US as a model that India should replicate) have either a common ethnic group or are at least distinct. India doesn’t meet this criteria. I could well see an Indian nationalism exacerbating skin color discrimination.

Quote:I've addressed the muslim issue. Which parts of India don't celebrate Holi? Island tribals, orientals and Kashmiris? OK, anyone else? 

The majority of the US has some level of resentment towards the East and West Coast elites. Does that mean the US is doomed to fail too? I don't know much about China or Russia, but I bet people in rural China and Siberia have resentment towards Beijing and Moscow. In every nation, you're gonna have some people feeling resentment towards others. That's not enough to break a nation apart.

Holi never seemed big in south India, but that could have just been the people I knew. Now that you mention it, the cultural resentment between the coast and flyover county in the US is actually quite severe – if you look at the Trump thread, people are throwing the term civil war all over the place, so I wouldn't discount cultural resentment so casually.

Now, for China and Russia, these places are empires with long histories and core identities – the rural areas, while perhaps resentful of the urban city slickers, still recognize them as their own. I don’t know if you can say that about India. Many south Indians I’ve spoken to tell me that they feel they are in a different country when they go to Delhi and Bihar, etc. That sentiment is not there in China and Russia – all the cities actually don’t look and feel that different.

Quote:EVERYONE cares about the British Raj. India is not the United States which achieved its independence from the Brits 250 years ago. It barely happened 50 years ago and it's still fresh in the country's memory. The scars of the British Raj are still deeply ingrained into Indian culture - the weariness Indian diplomats have towards the West and its ideas come directly from it. The reason why India took such a long time to accept capitalism is because it reminded them too much of the British/western world. Politicians like Shashi Tharoor are still pining for reparations from the British and there's people still demanding the Koh-i-noor be returned to India. I remember a decade ago a movie called Mangal Pandey came out. It was about the 1857 mutiny in British India - the movie was a huge sensation (it didn't do well at the box office), it created such an uproar of nationalistic Indian pride.

Perhaps I’m out of the loop, but at least from what I read in the press, India has many other concerns rather than taking revenge on the British. Personally, I think British rule was on average a good thing for India, especially if Mughal rule was the alternative. Point is, though, is that India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Pakistan were ALL under the Raj but demanded to be separate – some deep identities can’t be erased due to having a temporary common enemy. If let’s say Indian nationalists start studying the UKIP for inspiration – are they then going to start saying “f^&* the British Empire” to gain adherents? Seems a bit out of date. The age of imperialism is long gone. It’s cultural Marxism that we’re fighting against, which, while also global in nature, is nearly completely opposite in its outlook from the imperialism that drove the British Empire rather than the fatalism and self hatred that is driving globalism now.

Nations are built from wars. India did not fight a war against Britain to gain independence, so was the anti-British movement really that much of a formative moment for Indian identity?

Quote:You seem a bit too fixated on some analogy between the EU and India. As I've tried to explain they are vastly different scenarios. You keep trying to bring up that because in Europe the EU seems to be falling apart, and everyone is pining for a nation based on some ancient culture India must be facing the same situation or eventually will. As such, you seemed to have missed my point that because of the British Raj, we now have a common currency, flag, army, sports teams, passport and anthem. All things that contribute towards a certain common culture and nationalistic pride. And the EU has almost none of those - not even the currency since the Brits never gave up the Pound. 

Well I think it’s still the best analogy to India – if let’s say the Chinese industrialized first and created a big ass colony out of Europe from 1750-1940 ish, then the Europeans gained independence and had a common flag, passport, ping pong team, currency, etc. But then, at some point, the national identity would reassert themselves and this Euro mega project would become ungovernable, just like India is today.

Quote:Another weakness of 'the multiculturalism never works' argument is that it's always based on nations which import people who refuse to assimilate. The Roman Empire had that problem because it conquered a shit ton of land and then starting importing barbarians because it was struggling to maintain its own borders. I wonder if nationalism in Europe would be such a big deal right now if the economy was on the rise and migrant populations were minimal (you know, the way it is in India).

Bihar and Tamil Nadu - provinces and states in all nations argue. That's not enough of a reason to demand separation. Indian provinces have been fighting over all sorts of shit, I don't think I've ever heard of any of them demanding independence (barring Khalistan which was an anomaly). If anything, people tend to fight inside a province more often and demand their own province. Example of new provinces: Haryana, Telangana.

Very good points – like I said, since India is not a destination of mass immigration like Western countries I still think nationalism will take a very different form in India.

Multiculturalism creates empires, not nations. We are talking about all of humanity here, not just the West – there are few successful nations out there which don’t have one predominant cultural group. Now, we can argue whether or not the Indian identity you refer to above constitutes a culture, but I remain firm in my point that multiculturalism is a disaster and if India tries to push a “strength through diversity” type nationalism I doubt it will work.

Quote:No idea, but they damn sure accept the Indian flag, army, anthem, public schooling system, currency, passport, national railway system, etc. Speaking of nationalist parties - one should note that BJP - an Indian nationalist Hindu party dominated the national and regional elections recently. The regional parties got whooped. The other national party, Congress Party, has traditionally done well. Let me know when a pan-European party can beat country-specific parties in European national elections and I'll take this Europe/India comparison seriously.

That’s a good point, but let’s see what concrete pro-nationalist policies Modi implements. Eventually people are going to have their toes stepped on and these regional/caste/religious divisions can get exacerbated.

Don’t you think you are too quickly discounting the importance of a shared national language? Many other countries in which sizeable minorities speak a different language than the country overall are faced with regional separatist sentiments.

Quote:That people are inclined to support their own race (your example of Europeans supporting each other if they didn't win enough medals) does not negate my argument that Indians support each other for nationalistic reasons. I would be surprised if Chinese people didn't support other Chinese (race) people, but does that mean the Chinese don't have a national identity?

You haven't given a single piece of evidence that Indians only support Indians because of race. For your argument to stand you need to show me at least one example of Indians rejecting an Indian athlete based on race. I can give you an example of at least one Indian athlete being loved despite not looking anything like the majority of Indians: why do Indians love Baichung Bhutia, an oriental former football captain, so much?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhaichung_Bhutia 

You make a good argument here and I shouldn’t have gone off this tangent of sports teams.

Quote:Quote:What other country in the world has succeeded without either a common language, ethnicity, or culture? None! That's why these are the main markers of a nation state and why the alt-right is booming in the West as these nations reject multiculturalism and why the nation state ultimately failed in the Middle East. You can't just invent national identities and expect them to succeed.

The alt-right is booming in the West because of mass import of low-skilled immigrants who refuse to assimilate, whether it's Muslims in Europe or Mexicans in the US. Had it not been for that type of mass import I doubt the alt-right would exist. India does not have this issue. I don't know enough about nation states in the Middle East to make a comment. Though it's hard for me to make a statement when Islam/Wahhabism is involved. I mean, I could look at the same nation-states in the Middle-East as you do and come to a different conclusion: what nation state can work when the majority of people follow Islam? It's unfair to say nations in the Middle East failed because of a lack of common language, ethnicity or culture when Islam is involved.

Define culture - see above, most Indians are Hindu and we have a common flag, currency, etc etc - all these things are part of culture. Again, Europe as the EU does not have anything like this. 

This is the core of the question we are getting to here – the alt right makes sense in the West but does it make sense in India since there is no mass low skilled immigration to India (but, like I said, India is sending immigrants out)?

Quote:Language - Belgium has existed as a nation for almost 200 years while having 2 languages. And unlike the Belgians, Indians don't fight over language continuously. China too has multiple languages, does it not? 

The core Han territory in China has been under a united polity since the Qin dynasty. There is no analogous political contiguity in modern India. Also, you can speak Mandarin in every part of China. You absolutely can’t say the same w/ regard to Hindi in India.

And considering that Belgium is the home of the suicidal EU policies of mass immigration and has massive political dysfunction due to the Flemish and French speaking parts unable to get along, Belgium is a perfect example of how diversity hurts nations. Now, Belgians are civilized and get along with each other, but whether or not Belgium survives the breakup of the EU or not is an open question. Belgium’s existence doesn’t prove that India can work. And they have a king, which could at least be a national figure, while India doesn’t.

Quote:One of the problems of putting a Western lens on Eastern nations is that the ensuing prophecies never pan out. I completely agree that if you use the strict Western definition of a nation-state, India makes absolutely no sense. It never made sense and should've collapsed 50 years ago. And yet as I've said, many Western commentators and political experts have predicted India's demise in its current state and always have they been hilariously wrong. 

A lot of this ties into how people think. People in the West and India simply think differently about life, culture, politics, religion. Much of this has to do with the monotheistic religions that are prevalent in the West and how it influences your thinking. If you genuinely believe you must have one common tongue, ethnicity, and culture to survive (as we do in the West) and at the same time you invite barbarians into your home - no doubt it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy of needing one common tongue, ethnicity, and culture to have a nation. 

But that's not how Indian people think. Eastern philosophies have always been much better at dealing with seemingly extractible paradoxes like having a nation of 1.3 billion people with over a thousand languages and dialects, 4-6 religions and still somehow not collapse. India is not going anywhere.

100% agree, which is why all I’m saying is that we don’t really know how India will respond to a surge in nationalism or right-wing thinking because its cultural background is so different from Western countries. Since you agree with me that India doesn’t fit the mold of a Western nation state I think we actually agree on a lot of points, I think your point is just that Indians have more in common than I’m giving them credit for.

Like I said, I’m just fleshing out my thoughts so not trying to be antagonistic here.

Sounds solid, thanks for a great debate Arado. The common language issue is something I'll need to consider more.

(12-14-2016 01:00 PM)Genghis Khan Wrote:  Sounds solid, thanks for a great debate Arado. The common language issue is something I'll need to consider more.

Same here, curious to hear what others think in terms of how nationalism will play out in India.

An interesting analysis on the Modi's reform agenda and some of the political challenges he is facing.

Very interesting interview. According to this Indian who is an advisor to insititutional investors he thinks the cashless society plan is the worst man made disaster in Indian's history. He says of the 1.3 billion Indians roughly 1 billion live on 2 dollars a day and most of these people do not have bank accounts, are illiterate, and will be unable to adjust to electronic banking.

He states that roughly 93% of all the cash has been deposited into the banks because the middle class and up hold onto all the wealth have already done so.

He says that the government is making it illegal to own more than 50 grams of gold something like 15 ounces. And basically the gold dealers and all going underground and becoming a black market. (While not in this podcast the price of gold I have heard on other websites is going for 100% above the spot price in the west.)

(12-20-2016 08:30 AM)bacon Wrote:  



Very interesting interview. According to this Indian who is an advisor to insititutional investors he thinks the cashless society plan is the worst man made disaster in Indian's history. He says of the 1.3 billion Indians roughly 1 billion live on 2 dollars a day and most of these people do not have bank accounts, are illiterate, and will be unable to adjust to electronic banking.

He states that roughly 93% of all the cash has been deposited into the banks because the middle class and up hold onto all the wealth have already done so.

He says that the government is making it illegal to own more than 50 grams of gold something like 15 ounces. And basically the gold dealers and all going underground and becoming a black market. (While not in this podcast the price of gold I have heard on other websites is going for 100% above the spot price in the west.)

Here is this guy's three-part series covering the effects of Modi's demonetisation policy, if y'all are interested:
Part 1:
Part 2
Part 3

I've personally made it a point to ask my Indian friends and family members (people with their boots on the ground) about this very topic.

Seeing as most of my Indian friends are very much blue pill upper-middle class types, the consensus amongst this demographic seems to be that the long-term anti-black money effects of this policy will be a net benefit, at the expense of short-term inconvenience.

A lot of them seem to be of the opinion that it will be economically beneficial, their reasoning being that a lot of hidden money can finally be accounted for and taxed/reinvested back into the economy.

I had a most interesting chat with a good buddy of mine, who was telling me about what the family of a rich buddy of his was doing in order to circumvent the process of reporting the millions of dollars worth of (black) money in the now illegal denomination that they owned to the government.

Since they owned a large number of factories across India (thousands of employees in total, most likely), they gave a huge advance to their employees, let's say, a year's worth of salary, all in the (soon to be illegal) 500 and 1000 rupee notes, thus ensuring that they would not lose a large portion of their money to taxation, and shifting the responsibility of turning in the notes to their employees. Noting that the majority of their workers most likely do not have bank accounts (thus very hard to track), and the inefficiency, ineffectiveness and corruption of Indian financial regulators, they'll almost certainly get out of this whole situation scot-free, with not a paisa of extra money going to the government.

Given this little anecdote, I'm pretty sure that this measure will fall completely flat on its face at achieving it's purposes of reintroducing black money into the Indian economy as many of my educated Indian friends believe, leaving the poorest members of Indian society the majority of the negative consequences associated with this policy.

A lot of you are referring to India, as if it were a homogeneous entity with borders & a federal governing body before the British invaded. On the contrary, present day India is made up of at least 10-15 kingdoms that had their own cultural and linguistic identities.

On a side note, I'm of the opinion that BIMARU (Bihar, MP, UP) states just by the sheer number of constituencies wield a far greater influence on Indian politics and policies even though their GDP contributions are lesser than other states. The author in this article insinuates a Brexit style exit if amends are not made.

http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/uni...elhi-46501

"The state allocations speak to the quantum of skew. While Tamil Nadu gets about 40 paise for every rupee it generates for the centre, Uttar Pradesh fattens itself on Rs 1.8 per rupee it generates. It should be remembered that Uttar Pradesh had a distinct economic and social advantage over the southern states coming out of British rule, which it has simply squandered away through mis-governance and profligacy. The South, in turn, for prioritising education, health, economy and social reform, as governments should, receives the proverbial slap."

@ Thebassist

He continues in part VII

Quote:This article continues right where Part VI left off (for earlier updates on the demonetization saga see Part-I, Part-II, Part-III, Part-IV, and Part-V).

There is still huge support for Modi even among the poor. A big carrot is dangled before them, which makes many stay numb to their current suffering. During his election campaign in 2014, Modi promised to deposit more than Rs 1.5 million (~$22,000) in each poor person’s account once the government had seized all black money.



Massive problems have been reported with the new bills. Some have been printed on defective paper and are simply falling apart. The inferior quality of the print job is generally often on the appalling side of deplorable. The new notes are counterfeited with great abandon, quite likely to a much greater extent than they ever were in the past. So much for Modi’s plan to stop counterfeiting.

How he arrived at this fantastic figure is anyone’s guess. But given India’s GDP of $1,718 per capita, Modi has promised to deposit 1,300% of annual GDP in individual bank accounts. The total amount would be larger than the entire GDP of the US. Evidently, this does not even remotely add up.

So what is really motivating the anti-corruption feelings of so many Indians — including the salaried middle class — simply seems to be a mixture of greed and envy. There have also been hints that India’s income tax might be repealed. This is very appealing to the salaried middle class.

Banned bank notes must be deposited by 31st December 2016. Modi supporters widely expect that the windfall he has promised them will be announced soon thereafter. Not only isn’t there going to be any free stuff, but bank accounts are likely to stay frozen, because the Indian government is incapable of printing all the cash needed to re-liquefy the economy.

On January 1st 2017, when members of the salaried middle class start waking up to the reality that they have been scammed, Modi’s support should begin to crumble. Anecdotal evidence indicates that not only the opposition, but even members of Modi’s own party are unhappy with the demonetization scheme. These politicians have been left holding bags of banned currency, on which they have had to take a cut of 20% to pay for the services of the mafia.

They cannot oppose Modi openly, as that entails the risk that they might be seen as corrupt and unpatriotic. It seems likely that Modi will eventually lose his political support. But by then he may well have established himself independent of his party. He could easily be an autocrat in the making.

Vegetable prices have declined by 25% to 50%. Electronic transactions fail even in big cities, as connections are often bad. How is this supposed to ever work in rural places, where electricity and internet connections might not even exist? One needs to be mindful of the fact that prices are not going down due to excess supply, but because poor people cannot buy anything. Are they going hungry?


Is India the Next Venezuela?

India, the world’s largest democracy, is surrounded by banana republics as the accepted narrative has it: Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Thailand, and Afghanistan. The situation in the Middle East and in Africa is considered yet worse.

There seems to be a lot to celebrate about India. Its democracy has been sustained over the 70 years following independence. The army has remained fully under civilian control. Today India is also seen as an information technology juggernaut. It is claimed to be the fastest growing large economy. India is the next China, so the story goes.

The reality is very different from the perception of those who only see India through the lens of the international media. India has a population of 1.34 billion people with a GDP of $1,718 per capita. Almost 50% of India’s citizens have no access to toilets, electricity or running water. 48% of children under the age of five are stunted, a percentage greater than in any other major country in the world.

Contrary to the perceptions created by the international media, if Africa were a country, it would actually look better than India with respect to these metrics. India has lower GDP per capita and a proportionately greater number of Indian children are exhibiting stunted growth.

As a second step in trying to understand India, it makes sense to split the population in two parts: the 25% that have benefited — directly or indirectly — from the internet and cheap telephony over the past three decades, and the remaining 75%, whose lifestyle is comparable to a medieval existence, almost animal-like.

For all intents and purposes, India is a banana republic, a wretched place of poverty and disease. The only difference between India and other well-recognized banana republics is that India has so far avoided overly negative headlines in the international media; Indian lobbies in the US and the UK work very hard to make India look good. As noted above, this mainly serves to prop up the self-esteem of NRIs.

It has become fashionable to compare India to China. This comparison seems extremely far-fetched. Chinese GDP per capita is more than five times higher, and is growing more than four-times faster than India’s in absolute terms. If India keeps growing at the recent high rate of 7.5% and China at a mere 6.3%, it will take India more than 135 years to catch up with China’s economic output in absolute terms.

People who have been concerned about the demonetization policy have repeatedly asked me if India is the next Venezuela. My response was “I wish it were.” On per capita basis, Venezuela’s GDP is more than seven times that of India. Venezuelans fight when they go hungry. Indians are too weak to even leave their homes. Indians should be fighting, particularly the poor, who have always got a very bad deal.

When India becomes the next Venezuela, which hopefully won’t take longer than three decades, one would actually have cause to celebrate.

Almost half of Indians have no choice but to defecate in the open. What looks like a simple problem has proved impossible for India’s government to solve. The government nevertheless wants to send probes to Mars and make India the first cashless economy. In due course, Modi will get swept away by India’s realities. The problem is that whoever succeeds him, will very likely be worse. A military general perhaps?

Millennia of human progress in terms of economic transactions have been wiped out overnight. People have been forced to go back to barter.






Demonetization Continues

More than 90% of the banned banknotes have reportedly already been deposited in banks. This is widely hailed as a victory of the government. As Mumbai-based economist Mithun B. Dutta explained in a note, the reality is the exact opposite. He argues that demonetization would only have made sense if a large part of the banned currency had never made it into bank deposits.

Up until recently, the banned currency was selling for a 20% discount to its face value. Not only has this discount disappeared in recent days, but the remaining banned bills are now trading at premiums of up to 10%.

The poorest people lack the connections to deposit their cash and get it back out. The queues outside bank branch offices have continued and the mood is increasingly desperate. Businesses are closing, with many too damaged financially to be able to ever restart again. Poor people are losing their jobs.

Food prices are down by 25% to 50%, leaving farmers without the funds needed to support the next crop planting cycle. Shops remain empty, as discretionary spending is put on hold. Many businesses have suffered sharp declines in sales. Wheat sowing is said to be down sharply as well.

Who cares when one has problems of one’s own? This half-dead old woman serves as an example for more than 75% of India’s population. She cannot even write her own name, but is expected to learn to use plastic cards. For Modi she does not count if she isn’t paying taxes and isn’t part of the formal economy; but it is Modi who will eventually be thrown out.

Desperate poor people, whose pain is not reflected in any news or statistics.

Members of the salaried middle class, Modi’s biggest supporters, are slowly starting to face the pinch as well. When they went to their banks on December 1, 2016 to collect part of their salaries, they had to rub shoulders with the poorest of the country, for whom they have deep-rooted disgust. And then they had to go back home empty-handed or with only part of the cash they had wanted to withdraw.

They are still hoping that their bank accounts will be unfrozen after the demonetization deadline on December 31 passes. They will soon realize that their accounts will stay frozen, as simple math shows there is no other possibility. Modi will have to make a new announcement on December 31 to keep his social engineering project on track with yet another patch-up job, and to keep people’s hopes up.


There has been a significant surge in spontaneous outbreaks of violence across the country. Indian police are not sufficiently trained and lack the competence to keep a material increase in social unrest under control.


Conclusion

No one has explained yet how the currency demonetization policy will lead to less corruption. Most of the outstanding cash has already made it into bank accounts, but despite that, the queues at bank branch offices seem to be never-ending. It is the unbanked, the poorest people, who are most likely to have failed to deposit their currency and get their cash back out.

The government clearly has the intention of keeping bank accounts frozen after the official deadline of 31st December 2016. The economy will remain stalled at an enormous human cost. Modi is losing his control over his own party. He has isolated himself in a cocoon, surrounded by yes-men; but the middle class, which has so far considered itself to occupy the moral high ground, is starting to experience cash-related problems as well now.

At the same time, the political opposition is fragmented and weak. Modi probably cannot even imagine losing power, believing himself to be indispensable. If he sees his support dwindling, India could easily end up being pushed toward outright autocratic rule.

To properly understand all the undercurrents, it is best to consider first principles. India is an extraordinarily irrational, tribal and superstitious place. Despite the country’s long association with Britain, which by now has lasted over 300 years, it has failed to adopt the concept of reason. India and its institutions as they exist today were constructed by the British. It was inevitable that they would crumble, as India lacks the will and human capabilities needed to maintain them.

A society lacking in rationality cannot be expected to be able to differentiate between right and wrong. It cannot have respect for the individual, or develop moral instincts. Its people will be lacking in empathy and compassion, as demonstrated by the indifference of members of the middle class to the suffering of their desperately poor fellow citizens.

When such people are given western education, it merely sits in their minds as yet another belief system. Evidently, they don’t even understand that an ethical society cannot possibly be compatible with a government reneging on the contract that is printed on its currency.

Even poor people suffer in silence, or even worse, are fighting among themselves. They too lack the necessary understanding of moral principles to feel revulsion when they are mistreated. Instead of directing their anger at those responsible for their plight, they take out their frustrations on the nearest persons weaker than themselves.

With the passage of time, Indian institutions are necessarily mutating to accommodate India’s irrational culture. Culture cannot be changed through education alone, and changing it takes a very long time. India is likely to disintegrate at some point, fragmenting into tribal units or several smaller countries. Institutional decay has been underway for the past 70 years, but with Modi as a catalyst, its pace is picking up. The story of many countries in South Asia, the Middle East, Africa and large parts of South America is quite similar.

What should investors do? Ultimately India is likely to turn out to be a terrible investment destination. Indian savers should consider moving their wealth abroad. Indians are still permitted to transfer $250,000 per year, but eventually capital controls are bound to be instituted. Keeping in mind that Indian savers are already paying premiums of 30% or more to purchase US dollars or British pounds, there seems hardly a good reason for foreigners to send money to India.

Man, what a shithole.

India is not going to devolve into small countries, and especially not "because of Modi". That is a ridiculous statement.

Fake news media hates Modi as much as it hates Putin or Trump.

With regard to getting rid of the higher denomination bills - the "black money" was stored mainly in high denomination notes. The corrupt people either had to lose that money, or go to the banks and have to account for it somehow. It's very simple. This was never about stopping future corruption. It was about historical corruption.

India isn't going cashless either. The lower denomination notes still exist, and new 2000 rupee notes are being issued.

It is causing many short term problems; it has caused some even for members of my family. These will be resolved. We have faith in Modi.

This dude predicted rioting and disintegration of the country, and of the faith in Modi, within WEEKS in November.

Looks like that still hasn't happened. Oops.

He seems to have an unhealthy fascination with the British as well.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-20...-venezuela

Is India The Next Venezuela?

Quote:India, the world’s largest democracy, is surrounded by banana republics as the accepted narrative has it: Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Thailand, and Afghanistan. The situation in the Middle East and in Africa is considered yet worse.

There seems to be a lot to celebrate about India. Its democracy has been sustained over the 70 years following independence. The army has remained fully under civilian control. Today India is also seen as an information technology juggernaut. It is claimed to be the fastest growing large economy. India is the next China, so the story goes.

The reality is very different from the perception of those who only see India through the lens of the international media. India has a population of 1.34 billion people with a GDP of $1,718 per capita. Almost 50% of India’s citizens have no access to toilets, electricity or running water. 48% of children under the age of five are stunted, a percentage greater than in any other major country in the world.

Contrary to the perceptions created by the international media, if Africa were a country, it would actually look better than India with respect to these metrics. India has lower GDP per capita and a proportionately greater number of Indian children are exhibiting stunted growth.

As a second step in trying to understand India, it makes sense to split the population in two parts: the 25% that have benefited — directly or indirectly — from the internet and cheap telephony over the past three decades, and the remaining 75%, whose lifestyle is comparable to a medieval existence, almost animal-like.

For all intents and purposes, India is a banana republic, a wretched place of poverty and disease. The only difference between India and other well-recognized banana republics is that India has so far avoided overly negative headlines in the international media; Indian lobbies in the US and the UK work very hard to make India look good. As noted above, this mainly serves to prop up the self-esteem of NRIs.

It has become fashionable to compare India to China. This comparison seems extremely far-fetched. Chinese GDP per capita is more than five times higher, and is growing more than four-times faster than India’s in absolute terms. If India keeps growing at the recent high rate of 7.5% and China at a mere 6.3%, it will take India more than 135 years to catch up with China’s economic output in absolute terms.

People who have been concerned about the demonetization policy have repeatedly asked me if India is the next Venezuela. My response was “I wish it were.” On per capita basis, Venezuela’s GDP is more than seven times that of India. Venezuelans fight when they go hungry. Indians are too weak to even leave their homes. Indians should be fighting, particularly the poor, who have always got a very bad deal.

When India becomes the next Venezuela, which hopefully won’t take longer than three decades, one would actually have cause to celebrate.

It seems India's poor are the weakest people on the planet and cannot do anything to protect themselves. They are the lowest form of slaves on the planet, even worse than any Black ever had in Africa. Too malnourished, illiterate, and ignorant to organize for any meaningful reforms.

India's biggest problem has always been overpopulation. How they will ever fix that is beyond me.

India is not turning into Venezuela. India had been a socialist country since Independence under the globalists from the Nehru/Gandhi family (Congress Party).

It is finally becoming a nationalistic and capitalist country. Jayant Bhandari seems to be an autistic Libertarian who sees moves in 2D and hates Modi for being too conservative in his politics.

He could be saying the same thing about Donald Trump and we would laugh him off in the Trump thread for being a moronic cuck.

The socialist globalists who have been in control of the country for 70 years have been involved in nefarious dealings with the CIA/ISI and funding terrorism, human trafficking, smuggling, and illegal immigration from places like Bangladesh. It was these socialists who betrayed the poor class in India.

The problem in India is too large to solve overnight, or even in 5 years. Modi is required at the top for atleast 10 years to even begin the process of change. India has atleast 500 years of division, ignorance, and destruction to get over (Mughals, the British, then Socialists).

People are speaking as if the problems in India have been started by Modi! He is starting to end them! The enormity of this task is almost incomprehensible. The country was on the path to be fucked. It was simply not sustainable for such a large population. The Islamic threat is also ever growing. The Government is filibustered constantly by Islamic and affirmative action "lower class" identity politics.

Intellectuals like Jayant have had their turn and done nothing for 70 years. He can shut up now. I don't get why ZH gives this guy a platform, but my criticism of Western anti-establishment sites has always been that they are too cozy with 'British values'. Perhaps ZH is fooled by this guy's Libertarianism.

People like Bhandari are a classic case of "no skin in the game". Upper middle class educated Indians who are now in their 50's or 60's, who left India for England or America 30/40 years ago due to India's socialist and affirmative action based merit system,. They did nothing to improve their own country from within, but love pontificating from far away and criticize the people who are willing to get their hands dirty.

What the hell happened to India?

Throughout its history, the Indian subcontinent was known throughout the world for its cultural and material wealth. The Maurya Empire of antiquity was one of the greatest to ever exist in the ancient world. Some of the world's greatest philosophy, some might even say THE greatest. Four major world religions were birthed there.

How did it become this shithole that it is today? That's what I just cannot understand. How did things get this fucked up?

(01-24-2017 08:12 PM)rw95 Wrote:  What the hell happened to India?

Invasions of Aryans, Mongols, Arabs, Hindu Kush (slaughter of Hindus), Europeans, Engllish, USSR (check Bezmenov).
It is only now starting to recover in last... what? 30-40 years?

(01-24-2017 09:31 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  

(01-24-2017 08:12 PM)rw95 Wrote:  What the hell happened to India?

Invasions of Aryans, Mongols, Arabs, Hindu Kush (slaughter of Hindus), Europeans, Engllish, USSR (check Bezmenov).
It is only now starting to recover in last... what? 30-40 years?

Was it the USSR or the Mongols who made them crap in the street, and who made them elect a demagogic idiot who promised to put 22,000$ in everybody's bank account? Perhaps it was the Aryans?

(01-24-2017 09:35 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(01-24-2017 09:31 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  

(01-24-2017 08:12 PM)rw95 Wrote:  What the hell happened to India?

Invasions of Aryans, Mongols, Arabs, Hindu Kush (slaughter of Hindus), Europeans, Engllish, USSR (check Bezmenov).
It is only now starting to recover in last... what? 30-40 years?

Was it the USSR or the Mongols who made them crap in the street, and who made them elect a demagogic idiot who promised to put 22,000$ in everybody's bank account? Perhaps it was the Aryans?

Crapping in the streets I'm pretty sure is the Arab thing, maybe French. Electing an idiot is the effects of soviet, err, international assistance.

(01-24-2017 09:37 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  Crapping in the streets I'm pretty sure is the Arab thing, maybe French. Electing an idiot is the effects of soviet, err, international assistance.

So all the Indians had working toilets and outhouses, until the French came along and said, "Why bother with those toilets? Just use the streets!"

I don't know enough about Indian history to say that what you're describing is completely impossible, but I would want to see some fairly solid evidence.

(01-24-2017 09:45 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  So all the Indians had working toilets and outhouses, until the French came along and said, "Why bother with those toilets? Just use the streets!"

I don't know enough about Indian history to say that what you're describing is completely impossible, but I would want to see some fairly solid evidence.

Pretty sure that has to do with invasion of muslims and ensuing genocide. These things generally result in degradation of standard of living.

But yes, those with better knowledge of Indian history please clarify the record.

(01-24-2017 10:05 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  

(01-24-2017 09:45 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  So all the Indians had working toilets and outhouses, until the French came along and said, "Why bother with those toilets? Just use the streets!"

I don't know enough about Indian history to say that what you're describing is completely impossible, but I would want to see some fairly solid evidence.

Pretty sure that has to do with invasion of muslims and ensuing genocide. These things generally result in degradation of standard of living.

But yes, those with better knowledge of Indian history please clarify the record.

Look at the dates on that link. Most of them are from 1300 and before. A bunch of Muslims killed a bunch of Hindus during the middle ages, and so in the year 2017 they can't use bathrooms?

Come on man.

^ We get it. You don't like India and you're convinced that it's a hellhole. How about you let others who have a more nuanced opinion like Slim comment on the matter.