Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
Why are European countries like Germany, France, UK are developed well? Just something that happened yesterday that made me think - the Indian tolerance of quality. This is pretty much a cliche, the Indian chaltha hai attitude, but I think it is quite important. For the first time in India, I didn't pay for the pizza because it was delivered late. What surprised me is the way the delivery guy took it, giving me a look like I was at fault. And he didn't even apologize for being late, citing that the address was incorrect in their records and that's why it was late, this after the same Dominoes branch had delivered a few days ago (and was late then too, and gave the same reason). I have always thought that both Pizza Hut and Dominoes overcharge for their product. And I also think that the price includes all the free pizzas they have to dish out for their tardiness. Given that, the delivery guy should have just given me the pizza as soon as he was late (the time is printed on the bill) and not made me have to argue the point. This is usually the case in the US where I have gotten a free pizza many times, and in such cases I would usually tip the delivery guy generously. This attitude is prevalent in many aspects - mobile connectivity, internet connectivity, electricity, bad water, when you ask for a replacement for a badly cooked dish or drink at restaurants etc. Perhaps we have to start demanding quality and that is the one of the ways to start businesses as well as the Government to start changing. Because in the end, its all about Quality. Kiran
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
hoping that the other Kiran is somewhere far away Why? Now I'm intrigued :) I don't think so. It's to do with accountability. We don't mean what we say in India. It isn't that the pizza guy was being difficult. More likely, there was no process in place to cope with delayed delivery. I doubt this. Dominoes, Pizza Hut, etc. I'm sure have this as part of their standard operating procedure all over the world (though I have personally had pizza delivered only in two countries, what a shame!). Now either the delivery guy did not have that as part of his training (which begs the question why, is it because we Indians have this attitude?), or they almost never have a customer refusing to pay and this was a genuine surprise. Either way, my point is made. Not in academics. Our curricula are impressive, not intended to be implemented. Yes, they are. But it doesn't make sense to me why somebody has to learn the theory of relativity and rigid body physics in 11th standard. Even if taught correctly in all CBSE schools (which have these subjects in their curriculum, and which I followed all through my schools years in India), I doubt all those who graduate would understand these subjects correctly. And the fact that they are a government body means that they have to ensure a certain percentage passes. But then lets not talk politics... We need to slap this down to correct things. The sooner the better. It was a good start to turn the guy away for being late. Precisely what I'm advocating. We need to demand it, because I'm sure considering what we pay, we should get it. Kiran
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
Kiran K Karthikeyan [13/05/09 17:08 +0530]: Yes, they are. But it doesn't make sense to me why somebody has to learn the theory of relativity and rigid body physics in 11th standard. Even if taught correctly in all CBSE schools (which have these subjects in their curriculum, and which I followed all through my schools years in India), I doubt all those who graduate would understand these subjects correctly. me, i was glad enough to throw my maths and physics textbooks into the trash and/or sell them to a raddiwala after passing. some others - a significant percentage of every class, who were on the IIT / BITS etc kick, were like 'this is too easy, bring on the resnick and halliday, nelkon and parker, irodov, etc etc'
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
--- On Wed, 13/5/09, Kiran K Karthikeyan kiran.karthike...@gmail.com wrote: From: Kiran K Karthikeyan kiran.karthike...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Date: Wednesday, 13 May, 2009, 5:08 PM hoping that the other Kiran is somewhere far away Why? Now I'm intrigued :) NEVER MIND. I don't think so. It's to do with accountability. We don't mean what we say in India. It isn't that the pizza guy was being difficult. More likely, there was no process in place to cope with delayed delivery. I doubt this. Dominoes, Pizza Hut, etc. I'm sure have this as part of their standard operating procedure all over the world (though I have personally had pizza delivered only in two countries, what a shame!). Now either the delivery guy did not have that as part of his training (which begs the question why, is it because we Indians have this attitude?), or they almost never have a customer refusing to pay and this was a genuine surprise. Either way, my point is made. Your point, mine, who cares? The point that really is made is that this is not a rule to be implemented, it's a rule to tick off for your ISO9000 certification. Not in academics. Our curricula are impressive, not intended to be implemented. Yes, they are. But it doesn't make sense to me why somebody has to learn the theory of relativity and rigid body physics in 11th standard. Even if taught correctly in all CBSE schools (which have these subjects in their curriculum, and which I followed all through my schools years in India), I doubt all those who graduate would understand these subjects correctly. And the fact that they are a government body means that they have to ensure a certain percentage passes. But then lets not talk politics... We need to slap this down to correct things. The sooner the better. It was a good start to turn the guy away for being late. Precisely what I'm advocating. We need to demand it, because I'm sure considering what we pay, we should get it. Kiran Explore and discover exciting holidays and getaways with Yahoo! India Travel http://in.travel.yahoo.com/
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
It's funny you mentioned resnick and halliday - when I got to Australia after my 12th I was amazed when I found that I would be using many of the same books we read for our 12th boards. did you also read the orange and black edition of resnick halliday? -abhishek On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 6:36 PM, Sirtaj Singh Kang sir...@sirtaj.netwrote: On 13-May-09, at 5:16 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: some others - a significant percentage of every class, who were on the IIT / BITS etc kick, were like 'this is too easy, bring on the resnick and halliday, nelkon and parker, irodov, etc etc' It's funny you mentioned resnick and halliday - when I got to Australia after my 12th I was amazed when I found that I would be using many of the same books we read for our 12th boards. First year engg physics and maths was such a cakewalk. Second year was a bit of an attitude adjustment. -Taj. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - does the frog know it has a latin name? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
bring on the resnick and halliday, nelkon and parker, irodov, etc etc' Thanks for reminding me...should bring on some interesting nightmares for a few weeks :) Kiran
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
did you also read the orange and black edition of resnick halliday? Yep. Should be gathering dust in the corner of some bookshelf (or maybe the attic) with my school and engineering textbooks. None of those books have seen the light of day after both me and my brother graduated. Kiran
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
Why are European countries like Germany, France, UK are developed well ? Because they were imperialistic or because of good governance after hitler rule in Germany and imperalistic rules in other places ? What is causing Bulgaria to develop well ? Poland which was under communist rule is developed country ? If these are developing rapidly why is it so ? Because of lesser conflicts compared to India ? I think it would be obvious? Look how fair their skin is! If there's one thing they seem to be communicating in the obnoxious commercials from Nivea and Unilever, it's that whiter is better. Low populations, female equality, courteous driving, and the assult of science over religion (The so-called Age of Reason when Europe rediscovered Ancient Greece and Rome) maybe helped. Also they got very good at killing and conquering because of the frequent state of warfare that followed the fall of Rome up until WW II. If a monkey messes with your stuff in America, it gets caged and relocated or shot. No one would put but with the Jaipur crap because they think these are Hanuman's soldiers. But keep in mind this is all about the time in which we live. For most of Europe's history they were backwards. We just happen to live now instead of the time of Ashoka or Harrapa or Xanadu. We shouldn't take it so personally. The West seems to be doing themselves in quite finely at the moment. Even we Americans know that, hence the vociferous electoral expulsion of the Republican party from government.
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
Low populations, female equality, courteous driving, and the assult of science over religion (The so-called Age of Reason when Europe rediscovered Ancient Greece and Rome) maybe helped. In fact I think I made the point that the way people drive here is a metaphor for the problem. No one gives a shit about anyone else -- everyone tries to get ahead -- and the fastest anyone can go is 40KPH. Even on a very crowded highway in the US, I drive 100-120KPH. Because if I drove like they drive here, I'd be arrested -- most likely due to some other driver calling the police and the police showing up. Here's a thought experiment: Imagine you've got 2 groups 50 people each. Group A is blindfolded. Group B is charged with leading them though a maze. In Trial 1, you tell Group A that 10% of Group B has been told to mislead them, and the rest are supposed to take them though right. When those in Group A think they're being misled, they should stop and take off their blindfold. No one takes off their blindfold. Then in Trial 2, you tell Group A that 50% of Group B has been told to mislead them, and the rest are supposed to take them through correctly. Same deal. Everyone takes off their blindfold. Even the perception of corruption and the undermining of meritocracy is enough to stall progress. I try to wait in a line here, and people try to drift past me like I'm blind. No one does that in Stockholm -- they would be mortified. Q.E.D.
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
I try to wait in a line here, and people try to drift past me like I'm blind. No one does that in Stockholm -- they would be mortified. Q.E.D. Keeping in mind that most everyone on this list is enlightened. I'm talking about the masses.
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:20 PM, Ravi Bellur rav...@gmail.com wrote: I try to wait in a line here, and people try to drift past me like I'm blind. No one does that in Stockholm -- they would be mortified. Q.E.D. Keeping in mind that most everyone on this list is enlightened. I'm talking about the masses. And keep in mind that the most sexist and least traffic law abiding countries in Europe are the least successful in terms of per-capital productivity and median quality of life.
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
2009/5/13 Ravi Bellur rav...@gmail.com In fact I think I made the point that the way people drive here is a metaphor for the problem. No one gives a shit about anyone else -- everyone tries to get ahead -- and the fastest anyone can go is 40KPH. Even on a very crowded highway in the US, I drive 100-120KPH. Because if I drove like they drive here, I'd be arrested -- most likely due to some other driver calling the police and the police showing up. Not debating you point, but you should try driving in Boston or NY. Not that it comes close to the Bangalore situation, but if the road infrastructure was as bad as it is here, you would see pretty much the same. Seattle is over-polite, I feel suffocated there with people being so nice to each other :) However, for an even better experience you should go to Hyderabad. I have seen things that have made me stop and really think to arrive at the reasoning behind what some people do on the road. It goes beyond just not caring about others and wanting to get ahead, its a total breakdown of logic and reason. Kiran
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
--- On Wed, 13/5/09, Kiran K Karthikeyan kiran.karthike...@gmail.com wrote: From: Kiran K Karthikeyan kiran.karthike...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Date: Wednesday, 13 May, 2009, 7:58 PM 2009/5/13 Ravi Bellur rav...@gmail.com In fact I think I made the point that the way people drive here is a metaphor for the problem. No one gives a shit about anyone else -- everyone tries to get ahead -- and the fastest anyone can go is 40KPH. Even on a very crowded highway in the US, I drive 100-120KPH. Because if I drove like they drive here, I'd be arrested -- most likely due to some other driver calling the police and the police showing up. Not debating you point, but you should try driving in Boston or NY. Not that it comes close to the Bangalore situation, but if the road infrastructure was as bad as it is here, you would see pretty much the same. Seattle is over-polite, I feel suffocated there with people being so nice to each other :) Hah! You want over-polite, you are going to Inglistan, pliss. British pipples are crazy, even flashing headlights meaning you come only Sir, I go later. So they are going France, France pipples smashing them on every crossroad. However, for an even better experience you should go to Hyderabad. I have seen things that have made me stop and really think to arrive at the reasoning behind what some people do on the road. It goes beyond just not caring about others and wanting to get ahead, its a total breakdown of logic and reason. Kiran Now surf faster and smarter ! Check out the new Firefox 3 - Yahoo! Edition http://downloads.yahoo.com/in/firefox/?fr=om_email_firefox
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
Abhishek Hazra [13/05/09 18:45 +0530]: It's funny you mentioned resnick and halliday - when I got to Australia after my 12th I was amazed when I found that I would be using many of the same books we read for our 12th boards. did you also read the orange and black edition of resnick halliday? I categorically refused to touch that. Stuck to louis l'amour
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
Not debating you point, but you should try driving in Boston or NY. Not that it comes close to the Bangalore situation, but if the road infrastructure was as bad as it is here, you would see pretty much the same. Seattle is over-polite, I feel suffocated there with people being so nice to each other :) True about the east coast of US. But those two cities are known as the worst places to drive. How about this underly-thought out point: The more nudity and pre-marital sex and sexually liberated women -- the more successful the median person in the country (because Saudi is pretty successful as God decided to put all our oil under them, as they joke on American TV) -- e.g. Scandinavia, Germany, France, etc. I suppose Im just being an agent provacateur, but why should Bonobashi have all the fun? :-)
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
--- On Wed, 13/5/09, Ravi Bellur rav...@gmail.com wrote: From: Ravi Bellur rav...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Date: Wednesday, 13 May, 2009, 11:59 PM Not debating you point, but you should try driving in Boston or NY. Not that it comes close to the Bangalore situation, but if the road infrastructure was as bad as it is here, you would see pretty much the same. Seattle is over-polite, I feel suffocated there with people being so nice to each other :) True about the east coast of US. But those two cities are known as the worst places to drive. How about this underly-thought out point: The more nudity and pre-marital sex and sexually liberated women -- the more successful the median person in the country (because Saudi is pretty successful as God decided to put all our oil under them, as they joke on American TV) -- e.g. Scandinavia, Germany, France, etc. I suppose Im just being an agent provacateur, but why should Bonobashi have all the fun? :-) Nudity? Pre-marital sex? Sexually liberated women? Bonobashi? WTF? Now surf faster and smarter ! Check out the new Firefox 3 - Yahoo! Edition http://downloads.yahoo.com/in/firefox/?fr=om_email_firefox
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
WTF? To be frank: TF. :-)
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Bonobashi bonoba...@yahoo.co.in wrote: We don't mean what we say in India. It isn't that the pizza guy was being difficult. More likely, there was no process in place to cope with delayed delivery. That was only a verbal benediction, not to be taken literally and sought to be converted to action or tangible results. ...and the not-to-be-missed North-South communication[0] gaps. A friend's mother would say beta, ghar aajao, ...khana khake jao [Son, come home, ... leave after having lunch/dinner]. One of course recognized courtesy and knew better than to actually visit except for an exception(al) south-indian guy, who would dutifully spend each weekend at their home much to her annoyance :) [0] cant think of a better word to describe a cultural difference. -- .
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
On Monday 11 May 2009 6:08:34 pm Bharat Shetty wrote: Hello all, I've not read History regarding the transformations of countries very much. But there is doubt that lingers in my head during recent discussions I've had. Is it true that the internal conflicts transcending over various factors like religions, caste coupled with bad governance, mismanagement didn't help India to develop after Independence ? Why are European countries like Germany, France, UK are developed well ? Because they were imperialistic or because of good governance after hitler rule in Germany and imperalistic rules in other places ? What is causing Bulgaria to develop well ? Poland which was under communist rule is developed country ? If these are developing rapidly why is it so ? Because of lesser conflicts compared to India ? Let me give you a wacko reason. These countries were initially ruled by the Church which punished offenders severely and taught people to live by the rule book. The same people overthrew the Church and wrote rule books for themselves, which they continue to follow like they used to when the Church imposed its rule by force. In India a man threw some seed by the riverbank and grain and flowers grew out of them. He ate some grain, which was mixed with some pot and devloped a liberatian philosophy in which government could always be questioned. Hence we have India. The reason people do not stand in single file queues in India is because some moron idiotically defined queue as a single file line with a strict order of who comes forst and who came later. This is unantural. Watch a herd of cows at a gate and you will se that they form a pyramidal queue in whcih hierarchy is mainatined approximately, but not in a rigid, dictatorial, Swedish style. Indians, in true natural style herd up like cows in the true, natural definition of queue shiv
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
--- On Thu, 14/5/09, ss cybers...@gmail.com wrote: From: ss cybers...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Date: Thursday, 14 May, 2009, 10:18 AM On Monday 11 May 2009 6:08:34 pm Bharat Shetty wrote: Hello all, I've not read History regarding the transformations of countries very much. But there is doubt that lingers in my head during recent discussions I've had. Is it true that the internal conflicts transcending over various factors like religions, caste coupled with bad governance, mismanagement didn't help India to develop after Independence ? Why are European countries like Germany, France, UK are developed well ? Because they were imperialistic or because of good governance after hitler rule in Germany and imperalistic rules in other places ? What is causing Bulgaria to develop well ? Poland which was under communist rule is developed country ? If these are developing rapidly why is it so ? Because of lesser conflicts compared to India ? Let me give you a wacko reason. These countries were initially ruled by the Church which punished offenders severely and taught people to live by the rule book. The same people overthrew the Church and wrote rule books for themselves, which they continue to follow like they used to when the Church imposed its rule by force. In India a man threw some seed by the riverbank and grain and flowers grew out of them. He ate some grain, which was mixed with some pot and devloped a liberatian philosophy in which government could always be questioned. Hence we have India. The reason people do not stand in single file queues in India is because some moron idiotically defined queue as a single file line with a strict order of who comes forst and who came later. This is unantural. Watch a herd of cows at a gate and you will se that they form a pyramidal queue in whcih hierarchy is mainatined approximately, but not in a rigid, dictatorial, Swedish style. Indians, in true natural style herd up like cows in the true, natural definition of queue shiv There was nothing wacko about this post except its first line. Two points. The way he has put it, people will actually read it and laugh about it, and therefore, it may be hoped, remember it. In different phraseology, it might be said that most countries cited by Bharat were Westphalian democracies where one religious order ruled, and smacked down those who didn't belong. The others went wherever they found a welcome. That's why you find some Admirals of Nelson with French names, battling the French, and famous French Marshals who were obviously Scots, or eminent Frenchmen with German surnames. Those are not countries which have a plethora of identities to contend with. Those are also not countries where the accepted Established ideology, in this case, the religious theology adopted by the ruler, could be flouted lightly, likewise, the rules set under the uniform dispensation also could not be flouted lightly. So you called it a queue, and lined up in an I, just because the state said that a Q was an I. The contrary of what the two of them together are. Second point: what Shiv fails to point out, exercising his old world tact towards guests, hospitality and charm - you have to remember that when we refer to old world in his case, we are talking millennia, not years - is that Indian cows and Indians recognise exactly what a Q looks like, and do queue up, in that literal shape. We, unlike vodka-besotted Scandinavians, can sort out our Ps from our Qs, and our Is from both of them. It is important to see these things straight. Given Shiv's chosen vocation, I am very, very thankful that he can indeed see straight. This is a blessing and a benediction. Now surf faster and smarter ! Check out the new Firefox 3 - Yahoo! Edition http://downloads.yahoo.com/in/firefox/?fr=om_email_firefox
[silk] Imperialistic countries
Hello all, I've not read History regarding the transformations of countries very much. But there is doubt that lingers in my head during recent discussions I've had. Is it true that the internal conflicts transcending over various factors like religions, caste coupled with bad governance, mismanagement didn't help India to develop after Independence ? Why are European countries like Germany, France, UK are developed well ? Because they were imperialistic or because of good governance after hitler rule in Germany and imperalistic rules in other places ? What is causing Bulgaria to develop well ? Poland which was under communist rule is developed country ? If these are developing rapidly why is it so ? Because of lesser conflicts compared to India ? Best, -- Bharat | http://twitter.com/shettyb
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
--- On Mon, 11/5/09, Bharat Shetty bharat.she...@gmail.com wrote: From: Bharat Shetty bharat.she...@gmail.com Subject: [silk] Imperialistic countries To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Date: Monday, 11 May, 2009, 6:08 PM Hello all, I've not read History regarding the transformations of countries very much. But there is doubt that lingers in my head during recent discussions I've had. Is it true that the internal conflicts transcending over various factors like religions, caste coupled with bad governance, mismanagement didn't help India to develop after Independence ? Why are European countries like Germany, France, UK are developed well ? Because they were imperialistic or because of good governance after hitler rule in Germany and imperalistic rules in other places ? What is causing Bulgaria to develop well ? Poland which was under communist rule is developed country ? If these are developing rapidly why is it so ? Because of lesser conflicts compared to India ? Best, -- Bharat | http://twitter.com/shettyb This is kind of encyclopaedic: Political Science 101. Please find my humble effort at making sense of it all. First, some caveats: I don't think these features will help us understand things. 1. There are several questions, some to do with India being backward, some to do with various named countries being 'advanced'. 2. It is moot - debatable - if some of the countries that you have defined as advanced are in fact advanced. 3. You have mentioned imperialism, communism and good governance all in one breath, although these are concepts which are not all of the same type. What that means is that if you talk about red, yellow and green, we can discuss the differences and similarities between them, or the aesthetic superiority of one over the other, at least from our intensely personal point of view. But in a discussion featuring red, yellow and soft, this is not easy. Right. With that out of the way, it is still tough to equate one country's state of development with another's and list down with any precision why one is better off than the other. However, it is generally true to say that India - the British Indian empire - was ruthlessly exploited before independence, and after independence, the country that became India was developed according to several different economic policies. These may have helped or slowed down the process; even good economists can't agree wholly. It is also true that the sub-continent, what we call South Asia, consisted of myriad 'nationalities'; if that is confusing, think of 'nationalities' as identities. For instance, someone may be Tulu-speaking, a Bunt, and a Hindu. These are three distinct identities. Tulu-speakers will find much in common vis-a-vis Tamil-speakers, for instance, or those using Malayalam; Bunts find themselves with much in common vis-a-vis Vokkaligas and Lingayats; and you might find that Hindus have a sense of belonging together much as Christians and Muslims do feel about themselves. Next, there is the burden of law and the rule of law. It is a burden for our country, and several others nearby, because concepts evolved over centuries in totally different circumstances, in hugely different societies have been imported wholesale. These differences in social and ethical conditions create huge difficulties in getting a common acceptance of what is the rule of law, and in getting acceptance of such a rule of law as legitimate according to the other sets of beliefs that people under this rule of law happen to have inherited. For instance, the identities we just looked at. Some of the identities, the religious ones for instance, are not really very compatible with some of the concepts of the rule of law as currently in use. Finally, there is a social burden of the way in which we designed our political systems and our democracy. This is not always designed for the 'identities' who are trying to live under it, and the resultant disturbances and turbulence do have a lot to do with retarding progress. Please let us recognise these as features of our country which have not wholly been favourable for our development. On the other hand, with regard to some of the countries that you have mentioned, there have been other factors favouring development. Not all are factors that you seem to have in mind. For instance, it is broadly reasonable to say that Western European countries are more advanced than others, in terms of personal wealth and creature comforts of citizens of these countries, in terms of the smooth functioning of their legal systems, in harmony with their society, more or less, and in terms of the smooth functioning of their political systems, again in harmony with their society. These countries are at present no longer imperialist, or even imperialistic. They are mainly capitalist, but with variations, specifically variations which allow common citizens some protection from the ill-effects
Re: [silk] Imperialistic countries
Bharat Shetty [11/05/09 08:38 -0400]: discussions I've had. Is it true that the internal conflicts transcending over various factors like religions, caste coupled with bad governance, mismanagement didn't help India to develop after Independence ? You'll hear a lot about how india's economy would have improved if nehru had listened to rajaji instead of believing socialistic nonsense and also listened to sardar patel instead of his vague egalitarianism, hindi chini bhai bhai etc. India actually had a pretty decent balance of money left after independence (also true that there was grinding poverty as well), and a planned economy certainly squandered a lot of it. Why are European countries like Germany, France, UK are developed well ? Because they were imperialistic or because of good governance after hitler rule in Germany and imperalistic rules in other places ? What Call it good governance, call it much smaller countries with a much higher level of education and a larger industrial base (admittedly one that had to be patched up after all the bombs, converted to civilian use after producing war materiel for several years ..) is causing Bulgaria to develop well ? Poland which was under communist rule is developed country ? If these are developing rapidly why is it so ? Because of lesser conflicts compared to India ? A good way to go would be to avoid reading both leftist and right wing historians at the same time.
