Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

India - Male Chauvinism Reigns Supreme

Jump to new
Bob Carr's most recent comment on the Commonwealth, which includes India on his Thoughtlines blog.

DECEMBER 20, 2012
tags: Commonwealth Charter, Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM), democracy, human rights, Michael Kirby, rule of law
Acting Prime Minister Wayne Swan and Minister for Foreign Affairs, Senator Bob Carr, today welcomed the adoption by Commonwealth leaders of the Charter for the Commonwealth, a key achievement for Australia during its term as Chair-in-Office of the Commonwealth (October 2011 to November 2013).

In what is a significant achievement, the Charter enshrines for the first time the values and aspirations of a Commonwealth in a single document. The Commonwealth is made up of two billion people in 54 countries, spanning all continents and major religions.

The Charter reflects the Commonwealth’s commitment to democracy, human rights and the rule of law. It sets out the Commonwealth’s principles of tolerance, respect and understanding, freedom of expression, separation of powers and gender equality. The Charter emphasises the importance of young people and civil society, the environment and sustainable development, good governance and access to health, education, food and shelter. It recognises the special needs of small and vulnerable states within the Commonwealth.

Acting Prime Minister Swan and Senator Carr thanked the EPG, which included Australia’s former High Court Justice, the Honourable Michael Kirby AC CMG, for their contribution to the Commonwealth. They made special note of Mr Kirby’s work in leading the first draft of the Charter presented by the EPG.

The EPG was established by Commonwealth Heads of Government at their summit in Trinidad and Tobago in November 2009. The group, made up of 11 distinguished individuals from across the Commonwealth, was tasked with advising Leaders on how to sharpen the impact, strengthen the networks, and raise the profile of the Commonwealth.
Click to expand...

I wonder how the poor girl's family who was raped and killed would feel about this 'eminent " Australian's comment on governance in India.

He needs to post an addendum. It may get him a weak wet handshake in New Delhi, but it is peculiarly insensitive in the week in which she was attacked.

Some do live in Qantas First Class too much.

gg

gg
 
Garpal Gumnut said:
And they are?

gg
Click to expand...

I suppose banco would say they are a democracy. A democracy designed to accommodate their "funny" culture.:rolleyes:

In a democracy, government needs to connect with people
Published: Saturday, Dec 29, 2012, 10:26 IST
By Ravi M Khanna | Agency: IANS

Pragmatic politicians in a democracy would always want to reach out and touch people as and when they get a chance because the real interaction with the people, the real connect with the people, mostly happens during election campaigns only. Because once they are elected, public access to their corridors of power is immediately restricted by officials who surround the leaders. So the political wisdom says that they should seize upon any chance they get to interact with huge crowds in order to reach out and touch them before their next election.

But top political leaders in India, unfortunately, missed that chance, or may be deliberately avoided the chance.

They missed the opportunity when after a brutal gang rape of a 23-old trainee physiotherapist, concerned Indians poured on to the streets of New Delhi and several other major cities to express their outrage over the rape, the police indifference towards security of women and the slowness of the justice system of the country. This was a genuine and spontaneous outcry.

They were looking for some kind of assurance from the top leaders of the government that the culprits will not be spared.

But instead of assurances what they got was a senseless effort by the police to disperse the peaceful crowds, using archaic canes and water cannons and blocking roads and closing metro stations around India Gate, the venue of their protest rallies. Instead of government leaders talking to them and assuring them about bringing the culprits to justice, it was police beating up innocent young girls and boys holding a peaceful rally with batons and water cannons.

When the demonstrations continued every day and the scene got real ugly on the seventh day after the rape, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh came on TV to tell the crowds to stay calm and that the government plans to look into the issue of women's safety by appointing a committee -- a well known tactic of buying time to deal with the issue.
Click to expand...
(my bolds)
Read more;
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_in-a-democracy-government-needs-to-connect-with-people_1782976
 
As I said for a third world democracy they are not too bad. If people had rushed into the streets in China (GG's favourite Asian country since Queensland's economy rides on its back) like they did in India they would have got a lot more than water cannons and sticks.
 
pixel said:
I don't believe this woman's mistreatment can justify self-righteous chest-beating.
Her rape and murder by a pack of thugs does not make Australia any more or less racist.
Click to expand...
What is the connection? I can't see any.

Remember, before we condemn Indians as barbaric or backward: British rulers had ample opportunity to educate the population, teach them respect for their fellow men and women, and lead them out of the ancient Caste thinking.
Click to expand...
Pixel, you grasp at every opportunity to express how much you despise the British, to the point where one would have to wonder about some personal/historical grudge against them as a race.
I expect the British rule in India did indeed achieve much, despite your reluctance to concede this.

However, the British Class-orientation - think school ties, gentry vs servants - is quite a close relative to Indian castes. I would even contend that members of the Brahman caste have far more compassion for their lower-ranked compatriots than many members of the British "Landed Gentry" have for their poor.
Click to expand...
I don't think too many would agree with your contention here.

Ever read Dickens?
Click to expand...
Dickens??? We're now in the 21st century, aren't we?
Some may have tried to promote public education, but most pandered to the Nabobs and Rajahs; bribing them to keep the peasants uneducated and willing serfs. Mankind has still a long way to go to achieve real Humanity. Viewed on that scale, most countries are running neck-and-neck,
Click to expand...
What? That's truly an unreasonable statement, pixel, much as I dislike disagreeing with you.

Calliope said:
A rape victim in Britain, whether rich or poor, would receive much more compassionate treatment and justice than a rape victim in India.
Click to expand...
Perhaps let's not leap to judgement too soon. There has been a huge outcry over this hideous event, in India and internationally. The Indian police have announced that several people will be charged with murder.
Let's give them a chance to deliver justice.

banco said:
They've been a relatively successful democracy since independence, for a third world country they are not too bad with regards to civil rights and pockets of their economy (mainly the tech part) are looking pretty promising.
Click to expand...
Good Lord, banco, what sort of rose coloured glasses are you looking through?
 
banco said:
As I said for a third world democracy they are not too bad. If people had rushed into the streets in China (GG's favourite Asian country since Queensland's economy rides on its back) like they did in India they would have got a lot more than water cannons and sticks.
Click to expand...

China does not pretend to be a democracy. Any country which treats its women as second class citizens is hardly democratic. On their attitude to rape they are not dissimilar to China.
 
Julia said:
Pixel, you grasp at every opportunity to express how much you despise the British, to the point where one would have to wonder about some personal/historical grudge against them as a race.
I expect the British rule in India did indeed achieve much, despite your reluctance to concede this.
Click to expand...

Julia,
one probably has to take a look "from the outside" in order to recognise light and shade more clearly.
I have been brought up in a school system that imparted the view that all humans have the same value, dignity, rights - and especially the right to be treated with respect. That general tenor was specifically "prescribed" by, among other Allies, the British and Americans, as a purpose-built curriculum for our education system. It has very much penetrated my thinking, and I am immensely appreciative of the humanistic education afforded to me. History has taught me how easy it is for one population group to feel superior to another.

Unfortunately, that education has also taught me to recognise with little difficulty bias based on race, gender, nationality, skin colour ... Unfortunately, I am then undiplomatic enough to raise a mirror and hold it in front of anyone who decries the splinter in the neighbour's eye while ignoring the log in their own. (Apologies if I didn't quite match the King James translation.)

True, we are living in the 21st century; but in order to assess the present, it is not only my opinion that one has to know the history that got us to where we are. As Heinlein put it, a generation that ignores its history has no past -- and no future. Therefore, when I refer to Dickens (and the 10 commandments), I do so because I believe they are relevant to understanding many of current attitudes of the "Ruling Class". Even today, much of politicians' rhetoric about equality, rights, tolerance is just that: rhetoric. When it comes to implementing all those lofty ideals, one quickly realises that Humanism is still mostly a varnish, reality airbrushed for publication in glossy magazines.

Claiming moral superiority of Australian thugs over Indian thugs - which I interpreted GG's initial comments as implying - is IMHO hypocritical. Our primary demons may not rape as many pretty girls, but little altar boys and wards of state won't care much about the difference.
 
pixel said:
Unfortunately, I am then undiplomatic enough to raise a mirror and hold it in front of anyone who decries the splinter in the neighbour's eye while ignoring the log in their own.
Click to expand...

Pixel. I couldn't disagree with you more.

Not only do Western Democracies (say those in Europe, Australia and the USA) NOT ignore the "log" in their own eyes, but they traumatise themselves over it, they chastise themselves over it and they go overboard to rectify it.

There are exceptions. But take Australia as an example. We take in boat people who have arrived in our shores by means that are illegal (though disputable under international law) . What do we do? We feed them, clothe them, give them facilities (e.g. internet) way beyond what they often have had in their own countries. We give them free legal avenues to challenge their denial of refugee status if that ends up being the case. If they had arrived in anything but a Western Democracy (with a few exceptions like Syrian refugees in Turkey), they would have been at best consigned to overflowing tents in some arid wasteland and given just subsistence means to survive.

I am so sick of people criticising our Western Civilisation and equating what we offer the world to what comes from everyone else.

OK there are some racists in our society. There is as you say "bias based on race, gender, nationality, skin colour". Some skinheads will threaten or attack some Koreans in a train. A barman may not allow an Aborigine in his pub for no other reason than the man looks Aborigine. But how can you compare that to Christian neighbourhoods in Pakistan being burned to the ground because someone decreed that some burned pages of the Koran, maliciously placed in a mentally challenged teenage girl's satchel, were meant as an affront to Allah. How about a minibus in India with some Australian adults and children being attacked and burned killing all inside just because they were preaching Christianity.

And for the skinheads, they will be prosecuted if found and convicted. The barman will also be prosecuted and heavily fined, even though the previous year he was heavily fined for serving drinks to Aborigines whom he allowed to drink more than they could take and ended up causing some crime in the area.

When you compare the Australian thugs to those in India, you might find that the end result of investigations into the crimes committed were that most were actually committed by Indian nationals. The baby who was found dead after going missing was apparently accidentally badly injured by an Indian friend of the family who panicked and drove and left the baby on the verge of a roadside outside Melbourne. The Indian man who was apparently set on fire beside his car following a racist attack, turned out to be an accidental self ignition when he attempting to set the car on fire for insurance purposes. Another Indian man knifed in what was also regarded as a racist attack, was subsequently found to have been knifed by an Indian friend. There were a few other incidents but I can't remember the detail. The only one that turned out to be blameable on a non-Indian Australian was an opportunistic attack on a fast food employee. There were a few minor racists incidents that were not attributable to Indians themselves, but they were no different to what one gets in any modern society. I thing what grates in the minds of all Australians following the eventual discovery of what happened in each of these cases, was the fact that the final verdicts went almost unreported in the Indian press, whereas the initial reports blaming "racist" Australia caused riots in the streets there.
 
Julia said:
Perhaps let's not leap to judgement too soon. There has been a huge outcry over this hideous event, in India and internationally.
Click to expand...

If you mean judgement on India's rape culture...it has already been made.

The target of the protesters’ anger seems to be India’s archaic sexual violence laws and a culture of impunity for offenders, with even authorities demonstrating a blase attitude toward rape. In the wake of the Dec. 16 incident, officials have been criticized for belittling rape victims, and the son of India’s president apologized after calling the protesters “highly dented and painted” women, who go “from discos to demonstrations,” the AP reported.
Click to expand...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-rape-name-and-shame-database-could-backfire/
 
bellenuit said:
Pixel. I couldn't disagree with you more.

Not only do Western Democracies (say those in Europe, Australia and the USA) NOT ignore the "log" in their own eyes, but they traumatise themselves over it, they chastise themselves over it and they go overboard to rectify it.
Click to expand...

Hi Bellenuit;
thanks for underpinning your opinion with examples. Very valid examples, I hasten to add.
In any other context, I would agree with you, and if you read my comments on topics like illegal immigrants, live animal export, or crazy religion, you will find plenty of evidence.

What I find so objectionable in the context of this thread is the way some people took the opportunity to condemn another country. Hence my opening statement here:
I don't believe this woman's mistreatment can justify self-righteous chest-beating.
Her rape and murder by a pack of thugs does not make Australia any more or less racist.
Click to expand...
My subsequent replies, especially to Julia, provide examples of bias in segments of Australian and, more so, British society. Apologies if that took the focus off-topic.

btw, Julia, I do not "despise the British" if meant as a generalisation of "the British people". I don't judge a person for his or her beliefs and attitudes either. There is usually a reason in their history that explains, without excusing, what they think and do. However, I do hold some beliefs and attitudes dearer than others. Which is which will often depend on the context and available options, but two attitudes that consistently rank very low on my scale are smug self-righteousness and arguing by generalisation.

As to the log, I used the quote with the same purposeful exaggeration as the utterer of the original did. It does not imply a comparison of actual "cultures". I'd rather live in a reasonably "safe", preferably "affluent" suburb in a Westernised country than in Gaza City or near a Christian church in Islamabad. But that would only take us further off-topic, so I better leave it till a more suitable thread comes along.
 
pixel said:
... so I better leave it till a more suitable thread comes along.
Click to expand...

Hi pixel,

I get where you're at!
Got it first time around!!:p:
I don't know why you felt the need to explain it over and over!

Glad to see you didn't rise to the hackneyed "she /(he)" trolling/counter-trolling mechanism!



But I don't much care.

What happens on the other side of the Indian Ocean is out of my control.
 
burglar said:
But I don't much care.

What happens on the other side of the Indian Ocean is out of my control.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, unlike you, I can't turn off caring with the press of a button just because something is outside my control. This obviously means you "don't much care" about practically everything.

I suppose in future you will post opinions only on those things you control.
 
pixel said:
Julia,
one probably has to take a look "from the outside" in order to recognise light and shade more clearly.
I have been brought up in a school system that imparted the view that all humans have the same value, dignity, rights - and especially the right to be treated with respect. That general tenor was specifically "prescribed" by, among other Allies, the British and Americans, as a purpose-built curriculum for our education system. It has very much penetrated my thinking, and I am immensely appreciative of the humanistic education afforded to me. History has taught me how easy it is for one population group to feel superior to another.

Unfortunately, that education has also taught me to recognise with little difficulty bias based on race, gender, nationality, skin colour ... Unfortunately, I am then undiplomatic enough to raise a mirror and hold it in front of anyone who decries the splinter in the neighbour's eye while ignoring the log in their own. (Apologies if I didn't quite match the King James translation.)
Click to expand...
A large number of words here, pixel, but I don't see anything that suggests your education was any different from that which most of us received, i.e. that all humans have equal value etc. Nothing you say gives me any greater insight into your repeated quite vicious criticisms of all that's British across various threads.
However, it's your right to hold and express such dislike, even if it allows that such a loathing belies what you say you believe in.
bellenuit said:
Pixel. I couldn't disagree with you more.

Not only do Western Democracies (say those in Europe, Australia and the USA) NOT ignore the "log" in their own eyes, but they traumatise themselves over it, they chastise themselves over it and they go overboard to rectify it.
Click to expand...
Agree. The level of self-flagellation especially by the Left in Western democracies is flourishing, nurtured by the groups of citizens who pride themselves on being sorry for someone. Think, just as one example, the refugee advocates in this country who apparently couldn't care less about disadvantaged Australians, but who advocate living standards and privileges for people arriving here outside of UNHCR channels not offered to many of our own.
Think, also, of a similar group of people who are determined to resist efforts to encourage aborigines to take charge of their own lives, preferring always to regard them as perpetual victims.

There are exceptions. But take Australia as an example. We take in boat people who have arrived in our shores by means that are illegal (though disputable under international law) . What do we do? We feed them, clothe them, give them facilities (e.g. internet) way beyond what they often have had in their own countries. We give them free legal avenues to challenge their denial of refugee status if that ends up being the case. If they had arrived in anything but a Western Democracy (with a few exceptions like Syrian refugees in Turkey), they would have been at best consigned to overflowing tents in some arid wasteland and given just subsistence means to survive.

I am so sick of people criticising our Western Civilisation and equating what we offer the world to what comes from everyone else.
Click to expand...
+1 x 100.

When you compare the Australian thugs to those in India, you might find that the end result of investigations into the crimes committed were that most were actually committed by Indian nationals. The baby who was found dead after going missing was apparently accidentally badly injured by an Indian friend of the family who panicked and drove and left the baby on the verge of a roadside outside Melbourne. The Indian man who was apparently set on fire beside his car following a racist attack, turned out to be an accidental self ignition when he attempting to set the car on fire for insurance purposes. Another Indian man knifed in what was also regarded as a racist attack, was subsequently found to have been knifed by an Indian friend. There were a few other incidents but I can't remember the detail. The only one that turned out to be blameable on a non-Indian Australian was an opportunistic attack on a fast food employee. There were a few minor racists incidents that were not attributable to Indians themselves, but they were no different to what one gets in any modern society. I thing what grates in the minds of all Australians following the eventual discovery of what happened in each of these cases, was the fact that the final verdicts went almost unreported in the Indian press, whereas the initial reports blaming "racist" Australia caused riots in the streets there.
Click to expand...
Perhaps these final verdicts were also under reported within Australia. I remember all the headlines and extensive articles about the "violence against Indians" at the time, but I'm quite unaware of the outcomes you describe above.
Again, it's testimony to the national trait of "it's all our fault" which is mostly just rubbish imo.

pixel said:
I don't judge a person for his or her beliefs and attitudes either. There is usually a reason in their history that explains, without excusing, what they think and do.
Click to expand...
Sure. And this is what I was suggesting with respect to your own views about the British. You are, however, absolutely entitled to privacy in that context.

However, I do hold some beliefs and attitudes dearer than others. Which is which will often depend on the context and available options, but two attitudes that consistently rank very low on my scale are smug self-righteousness and arguing by generalisation.
Click to expand...
I agree, but acknowledge it's almost impossible to avoid a sense of generalisation when discussing, e.g. the entrenched attitudes of male Indians toward women. Ditto, of course, many other countries.

I appreciate the discussion. Good to know we can express differing views without incurring insults in return.:)
 

Similar threads

Sean K
Shocking news!!!
2
Replies
30
Views
7K
qldfrog
qldfrog
Top