The western media is so strong that even they have capability to covince us that western culture is good and indian culture is bad. We don't have itellect to analyse it. We are just like a straw, who ever has the strong wind we start flowing in that direction. Before we were under Russian influence now in USA dominance. Where are our own thoughts and way of life.
RE:Weastern Media and Green money
by Cape Comorin on Dec 18, 2007 11:18 AM Permalink
Every culture has both good and bad. And every culture is refined or changed by other culture. If a culture does not undergo any change it will be primitive and barbaric. The bottomline is that we should learn good things from every culture.
RE:Weastern Media and Green money
by Srinidhi Chakravarti on Dec 18, 2007 11:57 AM Permalink
There is no question of "learning". Aryan civilization is the earliest. There was nothing called "civilization" in the west. The west was nothing but a bunch of barbarians. Now, where does the question arise of "learning" from others. Its just a cycle we have to pass through, and its our mindset we are under western influence. Ofcourse, there is a lot of westernization taking place but, this culture will pull out as it doesnt have any strong foundation. Vedic/Aryan culture did NOT have anything bad. If we were that now, the whole world would have been at the feet of Bharat! Stop this inferior thinking of "learning". Aryans are noble, they started "civilization". We have to teach, not to learn. Yes, if this is ego, so let it be.
RE:Weastern Media and Green money
by Cape Comorin on Dec 18, 2007 12:15 PM Permalink
You are in false-pride and continue living in fools' paradise. I bet you yourself cannot follow the 'noble' aryan culture in this modern world.
It is good deleberation. you have put all aspect in front of every one. But time ,circumstance and geographical location , all three are contributor of the concept of morality. Comparison which u r making with the West is irrelevant for us. No discussion , no debate , what is the solution? Frankly speaking no solution appears, every political party is talking about morality as per their suitability.
So, just keep on living things will change naturally.
Morality is always relative, or as you say contextual. What may be morally right for you may be morally wrong for somebody else. What you say is morally wrong can be proved to be morally right. But not the same for the law. Law believes in "Absolute morality" while no such thing exists in real world. Its just an ideal philosophy.
RE:Morality
by Cool Dude on Dec 18, 2007 11:19 AM Permalink
I don't completely agree. For example, I might think it is morally right to commit a murder but that does not make it right. Morality has to do with accepted ideas and freedom and liberty of other people (for instance, impinging on the rights of someone else). Law is again not absolute morality. For example, a murder commited in self defence is different from a cold blooded murder. Law tries to cover as many general contexts so as to make it contextually correct. In that sense, I agree with you that there cannot be "absolute morality"
RE:Morality
by Damini Niranjan on Dec 18, 2007 11:54 AM Permalink
Instead of criticising the author on whether contextual morality is only in India or is also found in the rest of the world, let us tr
RE:Morality
by ss gpal on Dec 18, 2007 07:35 PM Permalink
What if I feel its morally right to marry a 6 year old girl and also my own daughter in law? What if i consider it ok to bonk 4 at the same time? It says so in my book
The author has no idea of the West where moral absolutes take a beating and the only thing that drives them is practical consideration of immediate gains. That is why they supported Osama bin Laden, Musharraf, Saudi Arabia, Taliban, and several dictators. They have no compunctions about indulging in colonialism, racism, Nazism, bombing other countries, opposing people like Gaddafi one day and supporting them the next.
I think the author got indoctrinated by propaganda. His IQ is not high.
In India, there are many people who want moral absolutes. That is why they ask for Uniform Civil Code, objective standards to resolve Ayodhya dispute, removal of Article 370 (moral of equality), oppose terrorism, etc. I think the author just plagiarized even this article from the West. It is so out of place in the context of India. Plagiarizing is a standard practice among Indian journalists.
RE:Author does not understand the West!
by Anurag Shrivastava on Dec 18, 2007 10:30 AM Permalink
There is also a disconnect between Indians who went to west 10-15 years back and Indians in India. Indians in the best are like fossils frozen over a period of time carrying silly customs and prejudices that existed in India then while Indians in India are confident and have moved on while taking the best of east and west. Indians in India have no issues adopting western customs if it helps them while NRIs have developed a ghetto mentality ( those who have become westernised are truly successful )
So if you really want to meet a prejudiced Indian - look for him in New Jersey and not in India.
RE:Author does not understand the West!
by Sahadevan KK on Dec 18, 2007 03:48 PM Permalink
Modi is the 3rd Number on brutality after George Bush and Bin Laden.
RE:Author does not understand the West!
by purna on Dec 18, 2007 10:51 AM Permalink
I agree with you. I have met many indians settled abroad in UK or US who remember India as it was when they left decades ago; they are really surprised and refuse to believe the changes that have taken place here; they stop growing after leaving India.
RE:There is no alternate to Modi and BJP today
by . on Dec 18, 2007 10:44 AM Permalink
yes. nandigram showd the true face of cpm/cong by showing cpm as the mass murderer group justifying the tit for tat theory n buddhadev was the hero of that murderer group.
