|
|
|
|
|
| HOME | NEWS | COMMENTARY | DARRYL D'MONTE | |||
|
October 30, 1998
ELECTIONS '98
|
How Readers responded to Darryl D'Monte's recent columns
Date sent: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 09:11:18 PDT
Dear Rediff, Darryl D'Monte's latest column was the most insightful one he has contributed to these pages. I am an avid newsreader and have read every bit of Indian reporting I could lay my hands on. What has been apparent more and more is that barring a few papers like The Hindu, journalistic standards in India have disappeared. Financial journalism for example is a disaster. Rank amateurs who have no understanding of the market write cliched phrases about market events. Their incompetence is stunning. Science articles, as Mr D'Monte says, have all but disappeared from most newspapers and, I presume, so have science correspondents. Given the intensely political nature of the average Indian, one would have expected that at least political journalism in India would be above par. Unfortunately the political coverage is at its worst; the most transparent exercises in manufacturing opinion that one can read. It is truly sad to see the pages of leading newspapers full of the same phrases day after day after day: "He dismissed it as mischievous speculation", "questioned the motives of the other party", "flayed so and so's position", "blasted his detractors", "denounced his enemies", "called it a creation of the media..." As for opinion pieces, the less read the better. In my opinion, one of the main reasons for this is the complete bastardisation of liberal arts education in India. Barring a few good institutions here and there liberal arts education in India mainly consists of three to five years in the nearest tea stall. Often it is reported that there are so many millions of unemployed graduates in India; in reality the tragedy is that there are so many millions of unemployable graduates in India. The ill-conceived reservation policy has contributed more than its share to this decline of standards. For, after providing admission to students without necessary qualifications, it is equally necessary to invest in remedial education to bring them up to par. Instead, what we have done is lower general standards and tuned our system to the lowest common denominator. In short, we chose the wrong solution by choosing the quota system and further compounded that mistake by thoughtless implementation. But that should hardly be surprising, I guess, for a country that liberalises the auto manufacturing industry before opening up road construction, a country that opens up its skies before it opens up airport construction, a country that lets the single largest market player run rampant without any effective regulation and so on and on. We are the original bottleneck experts. We can create status symbols out of things that the rest of the world treats as necessary conveniences. All in all, the socialist curse of a misguided first prime minister still haunts us -- that is, the State controls everything but is itself out of control! Prem
Date sent: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 09:13:24 +0530
Dear Rediff, It would be better if you stop publishing articles by D'Monte, D'Souza, Bhosle and others. Such articles raise the passions of readers. It is time people started writing with responsibility. I am sure there are a lot more issues that can be discussed on the Web instead of communalism and religious bigotry. Let us talk about the degradation of our Indian culture, the recession in the economy and the political instability that is causing all this. I guess we can do better if we can keep quite. Shankar V
Date sent: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 06:12:28 PDT
This piece from a Christian is on expected lines. Let's get to the basic reason why we Indians want the missionaries out. They are like white ants. They decry our Culture while on a proselytising spree. Now that India's Aung Sang Suu Kyi is very near power, they don't want their freedom to convert be deprived. If they want conversion let's openly discuss the merits of their religion. Do we start from Adam and Eve: If God created only Adam and Eve how did humankind grow? To put it mildly did Cain and Able fight over Eve? Remember God made the same mistake again at the time of Noah and his Ark. Maybe we should talk of Lot and his daughters from the "Holy Book". Or do we ask that if God loves the poor then why is the Pope rich? If there is no Karma, then why did He make the poor poor? Or do we question, why the discrimination between the first murderer (Cain) and the last one (whoever it is -- probably a crusader!). While the first one has been enjoying till the "Day of the Judgement"(what a stupid concept) the last one would not. It speaks volumes of God's impartiality. Why should He have a son only and that too a permanent Prince? If He is the most powerful, why cannot he put an end to The Devil (ha ha!) or conversely, if He can protect his followers so well, will not the Devil do the same for his and promise a better Heaven, since both of them seem to be equal? Remember dons protect their staff much better than the police? Let all the enemies of India note that Hindutva does not mean allowing scoundrels in. We have seen what is happening in the NE due to Nehruvian policies. From a population of 17% these guys have become over 60 pc in three NE states and attempted a coup in 1979 at Arunachal. Let them stop proselytising or allow an open debate and they can be allowed to be undisturbed. They very well know they never stand any chance on an open debate and that is why they resort to white-antism. They know what happened to Buddhism when Adi Sankara debated. Talking about beef, yes, its consumption must be banned. Don't they practise abstinence from pig's meat in Islamic countries? Let them become vegetarian's here. Who can forget their insidious campaign against Deepavali indirectly by asking missionary schools to campaign for crackerless Deepavali because of child labour? What about child recruitment by churches all over the world for propagation? Why don't they show as much concern for victims of child abuse? Or for carpet weaving children? Why can't they fight for a vegetarian world? When it is a fact non-vegetarianism contributes 60% to global warming. Will they? No. D'Monte's love steaks. One cannot stop the relentless pursuit of Truth. It is only a question of time before the Semitic religions have a natural death, when their followers start asking questions. Krishnan
Date sent: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:51:36 PDT
One can detect an anti-western bias in Mr D'Monte's article. There is nothing wrong with people in rich countries enjoying the fruits of their labour. What is really wrong is people in poor countries casting eyes of envy at rich nations. It is especially true for Indians to do so. A country which is the most corrupt and the most filthy in the world should take a good look at itself. Indians have no right to blame other countries, especially the Western ones. They should blame themselves and their leaders for the trashy condition in which they are in today. India has the dubious distinction of having the largest number of poor people in the world, it has the shameful honour of having the highest number of unemployed people in the world and it also has the infamy of having the largest number of people, including children, suffering from malnutrition. Being of Indian origin, I have found all these statistics to be so shameful that these days I deny my roots to other people. Kind regards, Mervyn Bond
Date sent: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 17:26:12 -0700
Darryl D'Monte's article against free market economy does not hold any water. His pointing at the rich nations' wealth as a proof for the failure of free market system is a case of sour grapes. The fact remains that the poorest countries are those that went the socialist way. Socialism is nothing but encouragement of the sheep mentality. The wealth of Bill Gates or Ted Turner has not come by looting the poor. Their money is from the Americans themselves. In fact, both of them have made major contributions to lots of charity. Darryl D'Monte should realise before he criticises advertising that he himself makes his money thanks to the advertisements placed on Rediff! There is nothing wrong in advertising. The only people who have inflicted misery on people have been socialists. But for socialism, India would have been prosperous. Socialists have impeded development wherever possible. The best bet for India now lies in embracing capitalism minus its speculative aspects. Socialism and laziness should have no place in our society. The only reason socialists cry hoarse is that they themselves lack any talent to do anything innovative and so indulge in empty rhetoric and call themselves intellectuals. Arvind
Date sent: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 00:01:25 -0400
First things first. D'Monte has done a good job of identifying the problem at hand. No matter what one says, "Hinduisation" of the country IS occurring whether some of us like it or not. For this taking place in India, I do not blame the Hindus. For hundreds of years, we have lived under the unjust rule of foreigners -- Muslims, Europeans etc. What we are seeing today is simply a reaction to the unjust actions that have taken place over centuries. Thus, the so-called plight of the minorities today is wrong, no doubt, but it is also natural. Humans too fit the mould of scientific laws that states that for every action there MUST be an opposite reaction. And today we see it in the angry outburst of Hindus. To move on to more pressing issues, Mr Prem Bahadur Singh has written a truly genuine response. However, I do not think that multi-faceted nations fail at all. Although they have problems with the initial blend of cultures, there is a formula that works. I believe that this formula is PARTLY being followed by Canada. We here have a "salad bowl" concept that has worked for the past 30 years. Simply put, the bowl is the country and the individual vegetables are the various cultures that live together to form the entire salad. This concept is greatly different than the US version of "melting pot" that strives, by law, to conform all Americans into one culture. Thus, I feel, that D'Monte IS correct in pointing out that at a time when other countries are becoming multicultural, it is a step backward for India to be "Hinduising" itself. Because, if we were to do this let us not forget that the caste system will persist, grow, spread and entangle its vicious branches on to the fabric of society. As it is wrong for India to do this, it is also wrong for Pakistan, Afghanistan etc. However, there is MUCH truth to all readers that have responded. Primarily, D'Monte is for great pluralism, which is a facade to his true Christian beliefs of mass conversion. D'Monte should answer this question, if he were to answer anything at all. Do you think that the missionaries that give a Bible before FOOD to starving Indians are going to go to Heaven? How can you look a hungry person in the eyes and say to him/her that they must convert to receive your aid? If this is your aid, then it is wrong! For now, I think this is enough. Hopefully, it should invite some response.
Date sent: 09 Oct 98 20:29:04 Pacific Standard Time
Dear Rediff, A Lefty column a day, spoils my day. Nikhil
Date sent: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 14:03:10 -0500 (CDT)
Dear editor: I would like to add a few points. A few months ago, Professor Yash Pal of the National Research Professor at the All India Council for Technical Education was invited to present the annual Tykociner lecture at the University of Illinois. The lecture, like all Tykociner lectures, focuses on the role of the scientist in society. His talk was entitled "Back and forth between the cosmic and the intimate" and, to me, presented a very balanced and nuanced viewpoint of development, the role of education and the problems engendered by globalisation. He stated a number of points, among them the plea that the current rate of consumption cannot be sustained and that we should be looking for natural limits to consumption. In particular, he pointed out the enormous imbalance in consumption patterns across the world. I thought the lecture was an extraordinary statement that sought to argue for a balance between what we can take from earth without irreparably damaging it and yet assure a comfortable life for all. The talk, in my opinion, was poorly received, despite the fact that the audience consisted largely of academics (from different countries). I wondered why. I think that in the West (particularly America) it is a sin to argue against consumption. The question of spending more and more on goods that increase the quality of life only marginally is not a matter for debate. No one questions whether they need something, they only ask if they have the necessary money to buy it. Since these countries have very low growth rates, globalisation and free-markets (euphemisms for capitalism) are the means to sustain consumption, and any limit imposed on consumption goes down very badly (hence the term conspicuous consumption). People will happily talk about recycling, but do not realise that it is consumption that is the bigger problem. D'Monte says that wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few. Well, they (the developed world) got there first, and they are making the most of it. One wonders what would happen to the world's resources if India and China were to consume at the same level as the West? How much consumption can be sustained viably? This is the big question that needs to be answered. I am afraid that this is not something Westerners are going to address because the answers will hurt them most. At the risk of sounding racist, I may add that such thoughts do not occur to the majority of them. It would border on sacrilege, and it would be a sin against the notion that an individual should do the best for himself or herself (no limits here). I think we have to forget the West in this matter. We do not have the power to stop them. Instead, we have to look to our values to address how much is enough. Rama Ratnam
Date sent: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 12:41:25 -0400
Unfortunately the problem of over-consumption is still an abstraction to most people in the world. Those who do have the resources aren't bothered, while those who don't are desperately trying to catch up. Caught in between are a bunch of environmentalists who talk in terms of a crisis emerging on a time scale that far exceeds the lifetime of a human being. There seem to be few takers for the idea of preserving the world for the future generations. One would rather gather more tangibles for one's daughters and sons to ensure their well being. Of course there is the historical (?) pride associated with possessing more and consuming more. It seems to me to be a paradox with no simple answers. Something that requires fundamental changes in our outlook and our value systems. But we could start with keeping our vehicles clean and by re-using all we can. Navin Khadiya
Date sent: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 13:37:48 -0400
Bill Gates used his brain and freedom to generate all that money. If the people of South Asia and other poor places are devoid of brains, then they are not worthy of human life. The only things that matter in this world are HARD WORK, EDUCATION, FREEDOM and COMMON SENSE. So Mr D'Monte, instead of blaming those 225 billionaires of all the problems of the poor in world, focus on these people who have the right and freedom to choose good leaders but keep on picking Laloos and Mulayams. So let it be! Let them suffer!! The government should only provide infrastructure and basic amenities. Everything else should be left to people!! Sandeep S Bajwas
|
| Tell us what you think of this column | |
|
HOME |
NEWS |
BUSINESS |
SPORTS |
MOVIES |
CHAT |
INFOTECH |
TRAVEL
SHOPPING HOME | BOOK SHOP | MUSIC SHOP | HOTEL RESERVATIONS PERSONAL HOMEPAGES | FREE EMAIL | FEEDBACK |
|