Why Republic day is more important than Independence day to me

A Republic Day poster featuring freedom fighter Subash Chandra Bose. This is one of many reasons I love this day more.

I am determined not to let me being busy with many projects get in the way of sharing my thoughts about the 26th of January, which is India’s republic day. It happened 2 days prior to the writing of this.

It is 1 of only 3 national holidays in India that have no religious basis (in an apparently secular country...that’s novel!) and unlike many other countries with a colonial past like India, republic day takes precedent over independence day in the country. It is celebrated with great pomp and colour culminating in a very grand parade in Delhi that celebrates the unity in diversity that is this country. I remember many a time as a child watching floats representing every state in the land and most years there being a ‘focus state’ that would have a special performance. There were also processions where there were nothing but elephants or camels as far as the eye can see, and the image of their heads and tails moving pretty much in unison is something that is etched in my mind probably forever.

A camel regiment in full splendour

There are those who have no idea what republic day is and some that find it rather peculiar that the emphasis is on this day (in particular I remember a Pakistani friend saying so). And for that reason I will go (very very) briefly into this.

Republic day (as the name would suggest) is the day that the Republic of India as it is known today was founded. On the 26th of January 1950 there was a proper constitution written by Indian people for Indian people put into practice instead of relying on a modified British one that had be in place since independence (1947). The date coincides with when the Indian National Congress decided that they were no longer interested in being a British dominion back in 1930.

For me that in itself is the significance: it was a decision that was entirely self determined: no overlord was present as was the case with the independence movement: there was no rebellion but more importantly no asking for permission from the British. I recall an absolutely farcical scene in the magnificent film Sardar starring Paresh Rawal where there was a ‘handing over’ ceremony of the nation from the crown to the Indians a bit before formal independence where the British handed over her majesty’s territory to the people who are native to it. In the case of the implementation of the new constitution there was no such person, and that is  part of what makes it so special.

The  whole reason this day is so important: the constitution enacted by it

So whilst freedom is paramount, the freedoms given to the people by themselves have greater significance as far as I’m aware.

On a side note I’m pleased that 2016 saw more mention of the overlooked and very underrated Subash Chandra Bose’s role in the independence movement. He is not even mentioned at any occasion particularly independence day so it is nice that people are commemorating him on what is perhaps the biggest occasion in the Indian calendar. It isn’t just a simply lumping together either: 16th January 1941 was the day when he escaped his house arrest by the British to begin his fight. A mere 10 days before the day that republic day is celebrated! Good timing and bravo!

शुभ गंतंत्र दिवस!

जय हिन्द!

A bit show offy but riders in the tirange (three colours of the Indian flag) had to be posted!

The Vedic Underdog

The trouble with politicians part II: some fixes to 'broken politics'

Most people can't stand the state of politics, and some of us also complain about it (me included). But how about some answers rather than just problems? Here's a few of my thoughts about how we could get people to feel that they're actually involved with decisions and that MPs aren't some strange species different from us:

1) Ban whips and spin doctors

Why do we need people who tell the naughty MP that is conscious objections aren't in his best interest and he should do as the party tells him to do?

2) Make parliamentary voting utterly anonymous

People of the same party often go to the polls together to the same booth. It always comes out in the media if someone votes against the status quo, which makes me rather worried about how it's undertaken. Something is badly wrong there

3) Give people a choice about tax money

I can understand that some who handles the country's money every day knows more than I do about where funding etc is needed but I don't support drone attacks and subsidies for very rich companies that control basic and essential services. At least let me have a say in that!

4) Let the people elect the Prime Minister/cabinet members

The average person can only choose who represents their constituency. All other decisions are made by party members. I would say the vast majority would not have picked David Cameron as PM. Not Mr Osbourne as the chancellor. It seems bizarre to me how little say we have about that.

5) Have an impartial platform for MPs and the public to have their say

If the media are in such cahoots with the government, there must be another way that actions of government can get to us without it being coloured by media bias. The public don't get enough say and as I doubt that the common man will have an easy way in to government anytime soon, how about letting them say what needs changing? Whatever we have right now at any rate is not getting that message across clearly.

I hope in that jumble somewhere are some coherent ideas that can be implemented. Even if there aren't I shan't give in to the hysteria that nothing will change and we can't do anything about it.

The Vedic Underdog

How the tabloids affect you even if you don't read them

Watch this. That's all that needs to be said! I have already posted this in my piece 'the trouble with politicians'.

The trouble with politicians

If there was ever an issue that polarises, alongside religion, it is the dreaded subject of politics. Many avoid this to avoid agitating others. Others try not to talk of it at all, for they find it boring or or they feel like they're helpless to do anything to change it. To confess an interest in it to most of the general public is to label yourself a dullard. Very few have made it interesting in the past; those who I'd put in this elite club include 'Rage Against the Machine', 'Spitting Image' and 'The Daily Show'.

So what has caused people to care so little about how services are provided and controlled in their country, and above all how it is run?

For many the answer seems to be politicians. Once affectionately described by Charlie Brooker as being 'less popular than shingles', for those that do discuss politics, to whatever degree, and are dissatisfied with what's happening they are first in the firing line of abuse. After all, as these people say, they make all the decisions, so it must be their fault.

However I do not agree with this. This will not sit well with most people, who see them as growing rich from exploiting us with no scruples whatsoever. For me though in the environment we have created, this is the only way they could have evolved. As far as I'm concerned it is the system that is the problem; the mutual agreement needed to get legislation into place has paved the way for it. Not that some have not made it worse but needing a vote to change laws or make new ones does not help. For a better idea of the procedure, just take a look at this: it's very time consuming and in certain parts niche; when a committee is put together to look at it there are at most 20 MPs looking at it.

For starters needing a certain number of votes in order to put something into action you need a group of people to back it. Like for example...a political party? Yes, your own conscience should sway you but in reality what happens is if someone doesn't 'tow the party line' they lose much of their power (say a place in cabinet) and may in extreme cases be kicked out of their party.

The first time it came clearly apparent to me was when I visited the House of Commons about a year ago and saw MPs discussing train ticket prices. First thing that was apparent was how empty it was; most of parliament weren't there. 'Fair enough' you may think initially, but by the time to vote on it came everyone was in there, and I mean everyone. I even caught a glimpse of the Chancellor briefly. Considering most of them weren't there for the discussion they can't have possibly heard arguments for or against. They'll still vote though! No doubt to whatever their party's stance on it is.

All of this is likely to make anyone who truly wanted to make a difference disheartened I'm sure; they can't do anything swimming against the tide in an environment where bucking the trend isn't just advantageous: it is critical. So what next for this individual? He or she may be pushed to explain what has been happening in parliament to the media. The media who have a particular disdain for politicians and do their utmost to make them appear as vile as possible. Just watch a Paxman interview and you'll see straight away what I mean.

I have never understood why the media aren't held more accountable for the way they meddle in affairs rather than just report on them. The Leveson inquiry was just the tip of the iceberg when it is all put into context. That said the media and the powers that be have worked together on occasion. But who is pulling who's strings?

Then there is the influence of big business, which is huge and yet is not spoken of readily in the media. It's like they control their profits too...hmmm....

You don't have to look too far for examples of that. It wasn't so long ago that George Osbourne described large corporation's tax dodging as being 'immoral' (big business link there by the way) and yet very little has been done to the contrary beyond some silly posturing. If I didn't know any better I'd say they have something to gain by not doing anything, wouldn't you?

I'm going to blame this on Maggie I'm afraid. Perhaps the unions did need reform but to get rid of them completely does mean that the common man doesn't have the mouthpiece to get his say into the ears of government. What is going to do, become an MP?

There's a reason why common people don't run for government; they can't afford to. Think of the time they'd have to take off work to write manifestos and run a campaign: no employer is going to be that sympathetic when it will cost them money (a theme that reoccurs far too often in this post for my liking!). They could leave work and campaign and then pray that they'll be elected. I doubt they'd be able to afford an expensive advertising scheme either so that puts them on the back foot as most voters are going to find out about candidates through posters and TV and other media. The pay IN the House of Commons may be good, but getting there is costly. Not that much of the cabinet have any need of being paid at all (regardless of source they're not far off the truth here).

All in all how on earth is the common man to stand a chance in such a world? Well as far as I can see, he won't!

So there you have it, assorted thoughts on the trouble with politics and politicians. If anyone wants some solutions, check out this post.

Of Surya Namaskar and self esteem: how touching my toes changed my outlook

I wouldn't be the first to laud the merits of yoga, not by a long shot. I don’t really need to go into all the pluses of it, everyone knows. I know that the National Library of Medicine (NLM) over in the states does a great deal of research into the benefits of yoga as well as Ayurvedic (Indian herbal) medicine and that the Marines have incorporated yoga into their physical training regimens. Instead I shall focus on how it can be beneficial for the mind.

Last month an organisation I'm involved in, the Hindu Swaimsevak Sangh (HSS furthermore in this entry) had a health and fitness month where yoga was being promoted. The flagship routine that was most promoted was the famous ‘Surya Namaskar’, sometimes referred to as sun salutation in English, but I won’t be calling it that here. As a part of this we as members were encouraged to do as many Surya Namaskars as possible over the month, and were even given spreadsheets to document our process. For me personally this proved to be an effective incentive; making it into a game (almost) and wanting to outdo my fellow members meant I really got into it. Towards the end of month I was doing 13 a day, a full ‘cycle’ if you please.

But that wasn't the only plus from it. Since I was a child exercising I had never been able to touch my toes, I yo-yoed between thinking that it was just something people can just do or that I would develop the ability eventually. As recently as January I had resigned myself into thinking that I would just not be able to do it. This had been reinforced by seeing my friend’s significantly overweight brother do it without any trouble at all despite doing no exercise whatsoever.

One morning as I was doing some Surya Namaskars I was watching my posture in the different positions quite closely and noticed that when I tried to touch my toes I would bend my legs in such a manner that they would bend outwards, to make 100% sure that I wasn't cheating by bending my knees to touch my toes. However this action made the distance between my fingers and my toes greater than the actual distance. As such, I straightened out my legs, and hey presto! I could touch them! It turned out that throughout my life I had been artificially creating an obstacle to this otherwise straightforward task.

This is something I can apply to matters of self esteem too; the challenges we all face can be difficult as they are, but if we spend all our time berating ourselves, putting ourselves down and not believing we have the ability to undertake the task at hand, we make it impossible. Simply because our outlook is coloured by the fictions we create.

And that’s how yoga improved my self esteem.

Thanks for reading,
 

The Vedic Underdog.

Comfortably foreign: the liberty that insults

I shall like to open with words written by Americans themselves:

‘Those who die are justified by wearing the badge of your chosen whites’

From “Killing In The Name” by Rage Against the Machine

‘We fought your wars with all our hearts,
You sent us back in body parts,
You took our wills with the truth you stole,
We offer prayers for your long lost soul.
The remainder is,
An unjustifiable, egotistical, power struggle,
At the expense of the American Dream,
Of the American dream, of the American Dream, of the American Dream’

From “American Dream Denial (A.D.D.)” by System of a Down

This will, most likely, be the last post I do on the New World for a while yet, and I meant to do it yesterday but…I didn’t. So here it is now.

Well some of you will be aware of what it was yesterday. You’ll also be aware about how I’d been writing posts in the days preceding it. Now for my opinion of the day itself.

Calling that day ‘ “Independence day”’ is more than just a joke, it’s an out and out insult to other nations. It’s made out to be a big fight for freedom but when I scratch the surface just a little I realise how that is a big lie. Rather a bunch of lies. I shall address each on in turn:

Lie 1: The British taxes were too high and they killed those that rebelled

First let me get started on the reasons behind this ‘ “War of Independence”’ (my, there are not enough quotation marks in the world to show my sarcasm here): the official reason is high taxes. I looked (briefly) into this. Yes, the colonies didn’t want to pay taxes on a type of sugar called molasses. Yes, that’s right one typing of sodding sugar! Suddenly despite speaking the same language, following the same faith and sharing huge amounts of culture suddenly didn’t matter. As I’ve been told repeatedly ‘distance makes us different’, something which I find absolutely ridiculous. Second, there was a…killing of people. The word massacre should not even be used and I will explain that shortly. For now let me just say that when I was reading up on this total non-event the British were fingered for killing 5 people during a protest, one of which was found alive a day later and another was shot hundreds of miles away. Oooh, the tyranny!

Lie 2: The British government were infringing on the colonist’s liberties

IT WAS QUITE THE OPPOSITE!

The real reason for ‘ “Independence”’ is far far more straightforward. By 1776 the British were making leaps and bounds towards the abolition of slavery and were looking to right some of the wrongs they’d done to native tribes by giving them land and space. The Europeans (MAINLY BRITISH, ACCEPT IT!) didn’t like this and so they wanted to be free from this. Not to mention how the Pilgrims came over because they hated the freedom of religion that was being touted back in Old Blighty. Yay freedom!

Lie 3: The rebels defeated a major military force at the height of its power

I’ve read that there were battles, yes. But several things have to be remembered: firstly the government in London sent a small army rather than a main force because they didn’t care so much about the outcome. Then there was a mad king to deal with. But for my money I’d say the Brits didn’t care that much about losing there because they’d ‘civilised’ the land already, killed off the savages (for the most part) and introduced noble Europeans with their fine Christianity to the land. Compare that to the Sepoy Revolution in India in 1857 where, in 3 days a major British force marched from Burma to central India through sandstorms to protect this vital asset of the Empire. Hence my reservations.

Lie 4: A new nation of justice and liberty for all was created

Biggest lie of all. I’ve mentioned slavery already but here’s some figues for you. In the UK slavery was abolished in 1808. It wasn’t until 1865 that the US followed suit. In the 1812 war, possibly the stupidest war ever fought, the native tribes of the north sided with the British against the Americans. For FREEDOM! The outcome of the war? Well, The Brits and Americans began to trade with one another (so soon after ‘ “Independence”’) and the Americans decided to wipe out the native tribes in the south. Nice one, guys.

I don’t find this day offensive as a Brit. And many Brits don’t care, and will even celebrate it alongside their American friends. It’s as an Indian that my offence comes. It took one and a half centuries of bloodshed for the British to end their tyranny, which treated all Indians as lowly slaves and has left huge amounts of psychological damage on the psyche of the nation to this day. And that was for financial reasons too! The people who fought for independence of that nation were truly brave and risked their lives. In comparison the Americans had to do nothing. It’s all pathetic, it’s all a joke. And don’t get me started on how many nations have had their civil liberties taken away in the name of ‘democracy’ by the US. Hawaii is most possibly the finest example of that. In more recent years the war on terror has been dished out by both for financial gain.

Meaning Britain and America are now the same. In the most disgusting kind of way.

Free Hawaii.

Regards,

The Vedic Underdog

Comfortably Foreign: a series of thoughts on the New World

Normally when I see the 4th of July drawing close I avoid it like the plague but this year I've decided to take a different approach and explain why I find the whole thing odd. So I present to you Comfortably Foreign, which is a small series of 'essays' on my thoughts about the Anglophone nations of the world (USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa in my opinion) and where we fit in, though with special emphasis on the US because of the upcoming 'holiday.' I hope it leads to fruitful discussion rather than a shouting match.

Regards,

The Vedic Underdog

Comfortably foreign: Why we’re all British

First a present an anecdote that got me thinking. If you don’t want to read it skip this paragraph where I explain why you, Anglophone, are a Brit. For the rest of you here it is:

I often go to international student nights and revel in the cosmopolitanism. Somehow I feel more at home in such surroundings than more homogenous social events. Anyways I was sat with an American friend and was chatting away to a Japanese student, and during this conversation I told her I was British. After a short while I turned to talk to my American counterpart (in English of course). The Japanese girl, not having a good ear for different accents in English asked my friend if he was British too. ‘No, I’m American’, he said. At which stage I jokingly added ‘Well, it’s the same thing!’ At this stage my friend, slightly offended turned to me and said ‘actually, I’m Polish-Ukranian!’ I found myself highly bemused by such a comment and retorted ‘Mate, I don’t have a single drop of English blood in my body, that doesn’t mean I don’t belong to this realm!’ At that stage he went to get a drink but how I wish he would have stayed so that I could have interrogated him about the ‘roots’ he was so quick to bring up.

I find it out and out daft when Canadians and Americans think that just by having surnames which are not common in Britain they are in no way connected to Britain. Almost always the name stretches back far too many generations or there are too many nationalities for the person to have any connection to. Most of the time they can’t speak a word of the language and I remember meeting a ‘Greek’ that could not name a city beyond Athens. Was hilarious and poignant at the same time. Some of you at this stage may argue that ‘fair enough we’re not necessarily the ethnicities we claim we are, but we are 100% American. Why the emphasis on Britain?’ Well dear reader that thinks like that, I’m glad you ask.

If your legacy is America, think of where that legacy itself comes from: the coloniser. The language, the attitude (see the next post), the culture. Yes, different cuisines came across from wonderous Europa but it’s no secret that when they were ‘Americanised’ they lost a lot of flavour and were filled full of sugar and fat. What cuisine does that remind me of? Yes, British food (which to be honest I don’t really like, I prefer the food of the motherland hands down)! Blues music is heavily based on English folk, and if you don’t believe there’s reams and reams of work done by music professors on the subject. And attitudes? Well just read the next article to understand how the British and American psyche are more alike than you may like to admit. And yet people over there hesitate to call themselves British, even if they do genuinely have British blood in them. ‘Anglo-Saxon’ was the word used by one counterpart. My friend, the settlement my town was built on was ‘Anglo-Saxon’, but that was more than a thousand years ago. We’ve been British since then!

Does it make that bitter pill ‘colonisation’ easier to swallow? It’s nice to say it was ‘the British’ that brought over the smallpox blankets, that had nothing to do with you I suppose. Well everyone was involved so I’m afraid that you don’t get off so easily. That goes for any Australians and Kiwis too: being part of the settlements means you were involved with the Empire, live with it, don’t finger the blame on people who live thousands of miles away and claim you’re bereft of sin. If you take my roots (which I am very close to might I add!) into account, you’re in the same bracket. Sorry, it’s just something you’ll have to live with. Condemning is one thing, to say that it was ‘them not us’ is another. Stop it!

In essence, enjoy your roots, nothing wrong with that. Just don’t disown the one nation that, more than any other makes up the culture of yours. It’s just silly. We’ve been allies for so long that it shouldn’t even matter. Here’s to continued cultural nourishment on a more equal plane.
Regards,

The Vedic Underdog

Comfortably foreign: Thoughts on the Anglosphere with focus on Anglo-American relations

Before it sails over anyone’s head let me just point out that the title is a play on words based on the name of a Pink Floyd song.

Now down to the nitty gritty of it all. The English speaking nations of the world (and I mean the proper ones, UK, US, Canada, Australia and NZ, possibly South Africa too. NOT INDIA) have, in my opinion, a very odd relationship. I would not be the first to draw this comparison. Scores of people that study English literature will learn of Oscar Wilde and Robert Louis Stevenson’s experiences in dealing with people and customs from different sides of the Atlantic. Oscar even summed up the ‘special relationship’ best with his quote that the US and UK were “divided by a common language.” Now this is something that has been a cause of much bafflement to me for a very very long time. It just doesn’t add up in my book. The primary reason for this is perhaps down to my own life; until recently I felt a strong kinship with Indians (and in some senses one could argue I still do) and this has been hugely influenced by my ability to speak their language. I, for many years, felt more at home in India than other cousins raised outside the motherland because of this. From this I always felt that culture and by some extension kinship was inexplicably linked to language. After all if I can express my thoughts and feelings in a coherent manner in someone’s language, a bond is formed, isn’t it?

And yet somehow Brits and Americans, whilst having admiration for one another, do feel they are different sides of the coin at the very least and as such see each other as foreign. My American relatives argue time and distance count for something. Whilst that may be so it can not fully explain the barriers that exist, because this is not the case everywhere. I will of course dip back into Hindi because, after all, that is a language I know well. Through colonisation etc various Indian diasporas have come into existence, two famous examples being Fiji and Surinam. In both nations there have been at least 5 or 6 generations of separation with India, and as such the Bihari dialect of Hindi, Bhojpuri, has been spoken amongst these communities and changed a little. And yet it is still intelligible for a speaker of a more mainstream more Indian form of Hindi. What’s more the nuances are accepted for what they are, nuances, and then the bonds form. They still feel a part of India, or at the very least that Indian culture is not something separate and distinct from them. Heck, even the Guyanese, who now speak English, still feel India is the motherland!

This led me to think that perhaps it’s a European thing. The reason I say this is because there is a significant difference between European and Brazilian Portuguese, not enough for them not to be mutually comprehendible but enough for my language partner from Rio to realise I’d been learning what they speak in Portugal and informing me what words were used in South America instead. That said from speaking to him it appeared that when he got over this hurdle with the Europeans they just chat and don’t make a (massive) deal out of it. It’s only natural to talk about differences, but I could easily talk about the differences between Scotland and England with someone, couldn’t I?

There just has to be a British element. Or at the very least a north-western Europe element because the French are well known for mocking the ‘ridiculousness’ of the way the ‘colonies’ speak their language. I’d argue that maybe (just maybe) the Francosphere are more divided than we Anglos are.

But wait they have that ‘Francophonie council’ (google it if you don’t believe me) where they meet up and, regardless of what they officially say, fight the onslaught of English in the international arena. I can’t think of anything like that for English, well at the very least it’s not as prominent, and in any case there isn’t much of a need for it, is there?

So wait, is this a British thing? And before any Americans get up in arms, that is the correct adjective because, whatever happens English came from England. And YOU CAME FROM ENGLAND. And if you disagree with that I explained this above. Have a read again about 'Why we're all British' if you haven't.

The ‘British’ argument is one that I’ve leaned towards for a long time since there is an ‘us against the world’ mentality in these isles coupled with a sense of righteous snobbery from having shaped so much of the world in the image it is in today. And the Americans have definitely got this too. I’ve lost count of the number of Americans who feel that their government is a ‘do-good’ police force for the world and that they really are bringing ‘democracy’ to world, only the world isn’t too grateful. Argue the political ramifications elsewhere, this is most definitely in the psyche of many Americans, much as Victorian England thought that they were doing a great service to the world with all its ‘expansions.’ If you’re anti-war you may argue about how your nation is a ‘great beacon of civilisation’ and how the world can learn much from following your examples. That, again, was something the Victorians thought when they pushed through all the labour reforms and cleaned up the Thames with the largest sewage system then known to man. I see a lot of similarities in mindset even if many Americans feel that England is some weird foreign country that couldn’t be more different. I’m sorry I still don’t buy it, why are Brits and Americans so adamant about considering each other different?

Well, the best answer I can come up with is that it’s comforting. We’re familiar to the Americans and they’re familiar to us. In this mad crazy world where national identities are often blurred and manipulated and changed Britain (or the US) is a wall to lean on and give and take culture from, and then pretend as though it never happened. It’s better than having a rapport with say, the French or Russians, with their weird languages and bizarre rituals, call the English foreign because they speak our language so we can talk the night away about how different we are when secretly, deep down, we know we have more in common than we may admit to. One thing I found particularly weird when I travelled to the New World (I love calling it that and sounding like some big shot explorer!) is that I felt far more at home in the US than I did Canada. That was down to one thing; a cynical attitude. As strange as it may sound, the cheerful attitude of Canadians, whilst lovely (and I’m not knocking it I swear) did create some distance. Weird. Not enough for me to think of them as foreign before anyone points the finger, but the distance was there. Just like there is a bit of distance between me and many people from London proper, but it’s not huge.

So enjoy thinking of Brits as totally different, Americans. I know it’s not true. I know our secret…

Regards,

The Vedic Underdog

My freedom hurts me (or, the terrible price we pay for free speech)

I haven’t written on here in ages not so much because of laziness (though no doubt that has been a factor) but because I’ve been battling health issues. I still am, but I’m powering through because my restless mind keeps coming with mental vomit that I need to release.

OK, that may sound disgusting but that said there are many things that have disgusted me in recent times and so I shall try and vocalise them clearly. But that got your attention didn’t?

Don’t lie!

Now on to what this post is really about. The diamond jubilee occurred about 2 weeks ago in this country, sprouting mixed feelings. The traditional nationalists have been all over it and then there have been those that have a good old dollop of British cynicism about the whole thing. The monarchist - republicanist debate has been going on for a long time and I shan’t go into it here beyond saying that I find both sides have valid arguments. But there is one façade amongst the republicans that does not sit well with me.

It all started a few days before the actual jubilee bank holiday was upon us and someone decided to post up a meme. The meme had a picture of the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh laughing, over which someone had ‘wittingly’ written ‘Haha, you’re poor.’ I found it a little stupid and offensive.

Not so much because they were mocking the royals (more on that later) but because of their insinuation; that the people who made it and those that share it ARE poor, and that they’re living it up and we have nothing. I’m not buying that! You’re sitting at a comfy desk sending it via your laptop or smartphone, you have plenty of food and free medical care. Yes, things are tight but news flash: YOU’RE NOT POOR! YOU’RE NOT EVEN CLOSE TO BEING POOR! And you can argue about how the upper 1% controls everything and death to capitalism blah blah blah (though when explained coherently I don’t have a problem) but when you’re a bit jealous that they have a big estate but you aren’t going hungry every night I find it hard to believe you. How about trying to help the actual poor rather than taking a pop at people that you’ll never meet and have very little influence on your daily lives??

Next time you’re trying to make a ‘social point’ on facebook or anything else (which for the most part seems like trying to earn brownie points or a badge of honour in front of your friends, looking like you actually give a damn about someone else just by sharing a stupidly made picture on a social network), how about going for something a bit more hard hitting, or at the very least with a little more fact behind it? I find it all rather ridiculous.

Now on to something similar: mocking the royals. This increased a lot in the weeks and days leading up to the jubilee, with Brits and people pretending to be ‘liberal’, ‘revolutionist’ and ‘hip’ getting involved. One friend even posted up an infamous Sex Pistols song. I don’t need to tell you which one. Some of it had a point about how they control land and questioning how much political power the royals actually have, and I have no problem with that.

Sadly not all of it actually had a point. Some of it was rather like the example I discussed above, poking fun at something without actually thinking for a second about its monumental stupidity. From people who are older than me and in most cases should know better before you play the ‘idiots on the web’ card. When you’re making fun of their accents, appearance and what they should and shouldn’t do you’ve gone too far. At some stage you’re just mocking an innocent family or innocent individuals with their flaws as much as the next person. I’m reminded now of a particular joke the comedian Frankie Boyle did that was lauded by ‘liberals’ (and I dispute that tag enormously) as being satirical, hard hitting and modern. IT WAS NONE OF THESE THINGS! It was nothing more than a comedian pretending to have the balls to talk about anything basically trying to get a laugh out of the ageing process. Give yourselves a pat on the back if you thought it was satire. You couldn’t have been further from the truth.

For those of you saying he was exercising his freedom of speech, you’re right he was. But guess what so am I by criticising it. If you don’t like it, go somewhere else. At least I gave reasons!

I just find that people take shots at the royals because, in the words of correspondent Jenny Bond, they’re such an easy target who will never fight back or say anything in retaliation. Congratulations, you’re all big hard hitting satirists, picking on such a soft scapegoat!

It is far too easy to look cool by mocking the Queen, and I for one am tired of it.

In short, if you have something valid to say about whether the royal family should stay or not, I’m ready to listen. If you’re just going to make fun of them, go away. You’re worse than useless because it means absolutely nothing. Now go get something to eat from your fridge and think about how ‘poor’ you really are.

Regards,

The Vedic Underdog

The most painful break-up part 2

Part 2 of the break-up and I’m focussing attentions a little closer to home. It could be argued that the reason I don’t get on with Indians that well is because they didn’t have the same experience as me growing up. Say that is true, wouldn’t that mean that other British Indians, who’ve been through similar stuff to you will be the ones you get along with best surely?

I’m afraid not.

It appears I don’t fit in with British Indians either. And why is that? It’s really not that clear to me to be honest but I’ll do my best to explain it to the best of my knowledge. What it appears to me is that, whilst BritIndians are more open to interact with the general population than other ethnic groups (and that includes a lot of white people, Nick Griffin), they often end up in one of two categories. In either case there is a lot of Indian egotism combined with a type of social autism that is most definitely British.

There are those BritIndians that hang out with other BritIndians and develop their own identity as such. They’ll all listen to that god-awful Asian fusion music (and my sister blog 'the musical idiot' will rip that to shreds soon enough, don’t you worry! ;) ) and spend their time discussing outfits and behaviours like old gossiping ladies as you do when you have a degree and didn’t grow up in poverty. Let’s call them aunties because that’s what they are essentially with the gossip, albeit ‘trendy’ because they listen to the audio guff that the youth do. These people often constitute a large proportion (but not quite all) of a Hindu society.

Yes, I’m about to burn that bridge too. I’m feeling extra friendly tonight.

In I walk in with my unconventional hair style, which isn’t the gelled up spikes look which is ubiquitous now or a pathetic side parting and instantly we’re off to a bad start. You’ll be amazed at how quickly that will make it into discussion even when something not even remotely about hair was being talked about. I wouldn’t care if it didn’t happen 9 times out of 10! Assuming we get over that hurdle they ask me my interests. Rock music? You’re a coconut (heavily Anglicised Brit) right? Oh you read the Gita? No, I don’t read that. I was too busy watch the latest generic Bollywood movie because that’s what Indians do, don’t they? How can you not watch them? Something wrong with you? I have also been described as being ‘too Hindu by many of these people for wanting to take an interest in my religion and culture, something which has been a term of endearment for my more international friends even though we don’t share much theologically. One particularly vindictive member of this group set to poison the minds of my friends against me for this ‘crime.’ Thankfully it didn’t work for the most part and I found out from one of my friends that he was doing this and it caused me a great deal of disappointment. He did end up souring a few relationships, and if you understood the bleak loneliness that causes you’d understand this is not mere finger pointing and gossip

Sigh. I don’t know why I bother. Now let’s say we’re at something a little less…normal. A Hindu society event. You being pious and having some theological knowledge should help shouldn’t it?

Unfortunately not.

What happens at these events is the most depressing thing of all. Whilst on the one han d these people make me glad in what they do - we have charity workers, Kathak dancers and playwrights within our ranks – they are as much in a cleek as their more boring counterparts and perhaps I was not at the party where everyone was invited to join the cleek because I’m not a part of it. I start going round and schmoozing as I would do with others that are Indian and get the friendly Pam Am air hostess response. For a moment, I’m the most important person in the world to this member of the Hindu society; they are eager to know my name, what I’m doing, why I joined and what I want to bring to the table. We will chat for literally seconds and they will pretend to be impressed by my accomplishments and I will genuinely give a proverbial thumbs up back to theirs but as soon as one of their little friends arrives I may as well not exist. I can understand wanting to give someone you know better more of your time but to just walk away? When I want to do something for the samaj (community)? What’s going on there? Sometimes it does feel like someone genuinely wants to talk to you and hear what you have to say but then someone higher up ushers them away as to say ‘you don’t belong with them’ and suddenly I’m the perpetual outcast again. I hear speeches all the time about how these people become your closest friends, and your family and there have even been marriages out of this. I’ve yet to feel this warm welcome. I have been the bystander whilst everyone else has been having fun. I watch as two people who have just met start telling each other jokes that are barely funny but have each other in peals of laughter because of their new found camaraderie. OK, I’ll be over here staring at the floor while you form a new bond with everyone else, OK? Grand…

There are many people out there who share a passion for their spiritual persuasion in the same manner that I do that have been shunned by this pseudo-friendly manner of doing things. I even brought it up once to a member of the society. He agreed that this was the case, that there’s a social order that you are either in or out of, but he also promptly shrugged his shoulders. Is that it for those of us who don’t quite fit your mould? Cheers!

Then there’s another group of people. The coconuts. They shun anything even remotely of their ethnicity and are for most intents and purposes white people. Yet they hang out with other coconuts. Something weird here, don’t you think? Indian egotism and clinginess at play again. They are always looking to ‘out-white’ each other, having more ridiculous and generic British accents, more debauchery than who they emulate (as hard as that is to believe) and are ever more looking to outdo each other in terms of immorality. Maybe it’s some new drug, maybe it’s who they can sleep with, it never quite seems to end. I look conservative in their eyes, an old dinosaur who is a party pooper cos I don’t want to get involved in their stupid games. And yet a great deal of head scratching goes on when they see that I actually have white friends, despite being no-so-white. The mind boggles.

So there you have it, reasons why I’m not British Indian in the conventional sense. I wish it wouldn’t matter but try existing just outside a society and you’ll know what I mean. As ever, my relatives expect me to get married at some stage. Will that happen?

शमा कीजिये नानाजी, आपका हर सपना पूरा नहीं कर पाउँगा…

Regards

The Vedic Underdog

The most painful break-up part 1

My national identity is something I have covered before but recent events have seen a slight change in my perception of it.

And by that I mean I’m even more confused than I was before. But before that the most painful break up anyone can ever have, more than you can in a romantic sense.

I have broken up with India. Yes, it hurts to even write those words, and believe me I can hardly believe I’ve written them on this screen, they seem branded into it now, something which shouldn’t really be there. But it is unfortunately how things are. And when I say I broke up with India, it also means that relations with most British Indians have also been soured. This is something that has been boiling up since the end of last year but it really has come to a head in recent times. I shall endeavour to explain.

One should not stereotype a whole nation when one can avoid it but it is hard for me to do anything to the contrary when one meets nothing but people of a certain sort. And Indians seem to come in one single flavour; arrogant show offs that only wish to show you up so that they can look superior. I shall describe but a small number of anecdotes, or should I say evidence, to support this. So I shall begin with an incident that took place with a retired soldier. That’s right, a PROUD, PATRIOTIC INDIAN who would put his life on the line for the nation but could not let his ego subside for even a second.

The incident in question was quite straightforward really. He introduced himself (in English grrr) and offered his hand forth in greeting. Me being the traditionalist placed my palms together in the conventional ‘Namaste’ as it felt more appropriate to me (and I suppose I wanted to impress a little, but we’re talking small potatoes here!). At this stage the gentleman thought it appropriate to say that handshaking was the more internationally accepted manner of greeting. Yes but Namaste is sweeter, more personal and more hygienic I said back. At this stage he proceeded to tell me some bull about how hand shaking was a gesture that proved to the other person that your hand is clean and available to shake because of it. Look it up if you don’t believe me but I know for a fact that hand shaking is an indication that there is no weapon in that hand, it is a friendly gesture. But this guy wasn’t having any of it. Fantabulous. Later on he said dinner was ready and so we should go to the dining room and so we should leave. In my British humour style I dared to utter the words ‘get out’ as part of a longer sentence, one that was not vulgar. But of course idiot-brained Indians can’t see it that way, I was demeaning them, wasn’t I? In fact at the time I had no idea why one of the people I had been talking to decided to say to me ‘I was taken aback by the way you were speaking to me.’ I apologised profusely despite not being fully sure about what I’d done wrong at the time. Later on my mother told me about how it was the height of rudeness to say those words together in Indian society, and that it would appear that the person that took offence. Poor English wins again (see ‘The English disease of Indians’ for more hilarious stories like this). If you’re offended by that, then take a look at this, it sums up what I think of your arrogance (contains colourful language):

http://kingmediocre.deviantart.com/#/d4vxbr9 :)

Some of you may also be aware about how India is the most vegetarian country on the planet. No other country even comes close. Yet within her borders you hear the stupidest and most insecure arguments EVER against vegetarianism. Stuff you would expect more brain-dead people in other countries to say where it isn’t the norm. If you’re vegetarian for health reasons, they leave you alone. But I dared to argue from a moral and ecological point of view, that killing animals is bad and that the environment suffers for it. And when I say that what do I get to hear? ‘But you’re upsetting the food chain!’

You’re sat in a marble house, eating sweets that were made in an electric oven and I came to this country in a giant metal bird that weighs more than several elephants. What the hell is natural here? And the environmental argument is juxtaposed by the magical health benefits of meat that boil down to one person feeling slightly better after going back on the butter chicken (psychosomatic maybe?) and ergo nuts to how it exhausts the planet. My personal favourite response has to be a relative of mine, who despite having heard all the arguments against meat eating and knowing them back to front living in a house of staunch vegetarians says nothing more than ‘मै बचपन से खाके आया हूँ!’ (I’ve been eating it since childhood!) as though it makes it all OK. Indians, it appears, always want to have the moral high ground over you. Even if they’re killing babies with hammers and you aren’t, they’re undertaking some greater good that you haven’t thought of. For that reason, you’re the monster!

It also underlines a conservative attitude that almost everyone has in India, regardless of age, that they will not budge on. It’s amazing that such a level of insecurity and such a large insecurity complex exists within the nation. I am from a proud Hindu family, such that my father and uncles will say to an Indian Christian ‘why don’t you become a Hindu, your ancestors were!’ To which the Christian will invariably reply with how it was his father’s religion, and his father before him etc. I would imagine that if I was an Indian Christian I would most probably remain so for the same reason. Who cares about personal growth though, right?

Not to mention Indian weddings. I thoroughly and whole-heartedly despise them. They are nothing more than extravagant expressions of wealth for the parents of the two kids getting married. It’s amazing how Indians save their money throughout their lives to blow it all on one event. It makes no financial sense in the slightest. I remember a story in a British newspaper of a wealthy Indian-Belgian businessman that had thrown the world’s most expensive wedding. And can you believe it my relatives were proud! Forget the scientists combating polio every day, forget the Indian author winning the Booker prize, this gets everyone riled up! And I have lost count the number of hours of my life I have frittered away hearing Indians of all ages describing in painstaking detail the intricacies of it all. I felt like shouting out ‘I DON’T CARE HOW MANY DIFFERENT TYPES OF MALT LIQUOR THEY HAD AT ALL!’ but I resisted that urge. Another reason I hate them is because I’ve heard tales of great mental abuse one family will give another if everything isn’t right. Why wasn’t there non-veg (meat) in the reception? The alcohol selection is beneath our dignity! Yes, this is actual dialogue from an actual conversation, albeit translated for your convenience.

Is this what has become of the land of the famous Indus valley, pioneers of surgery, poetry linguistics…I could go on? Whilst every Indian could probably recite to you some amazing facts about our ancestors it never ceases to astound me to think that this country has produced so many writers, scientists and activists when everyone carries on this way. Hinduism is a miracle simply for the fact that an Indian came up with something so radical. And me with my weird, more open minded look on things, not to mention the audacity to be a boy with long hair (oh my god, what’s wrong with you, don’t you want to look good? I get told) means I don’t fit in.

Fine, I’m not Indian then. Got no idea what I am but I’m not Indian clearly. I’m not British Indian by most respects but see part 2 for that. Yes I haven’t even started on you guys yet!

By Indian society I am close to marriageable age now. But with such a grim selection and a hairstyle and a personality that is not shallow and egotistical in the Indian way am I going to find a bride?

शमा कीजिये नानाजी, आपका हर सपना पूरा नहीं कर पाउँगा…

I’ve got the Kaliyug blues badly it seems, summed up in song by Digital Hippy here: http://soundcloud.com/digital-hippy/kaliyug-blues

Regards,

The Vedic Underdog

Are India and Italy the same country? (Or, who really runs the world?)

Here’s an entry I’ve been meaning to do for some time but have only just got round to. I’m going back to commenting on Indian society. Now the title may lead you to think that this is going to be yet another damning article against Sonia Gandhi/Maino/whatever her name is, but it really isn’t. You don’t need me to tell you she’s Italian. But that is largely irrelevant to the point I want to make.

I’m looking to compare two countries, and one person can hardly be a valid cause for such a comparison. India and Italy have many things in common, and this is a short list only. For instance both can claim broad and internationally well loved cuisines, a wealth of flavours and a real commitment to food preparation. The Italians, particularly in the south, will spend a very long time making meals and nothing will get in the way of that. It is of paramount importance to them that the appropriate amount of time and care is taken in making each meal so that it is always a winner of a dish (or dishes J ). Similarly in India nothing can be construed as a meal unless it has been cooked and has used more than 3 or 4 fresh ingredients. I remember an aunt of mine who lives there saying that, because of the way we eat in the West (i.e. cereal for breakfast, sandwich for lunch then a cooked dinner in the evening) we only eat once a day. And she has a point, can it really be a meal if some effort hasn’t been put into it?

Second both countries have a strong familial ethic. Families are important, and rightly so. We can argue till the cows come home about dysfunction but fact remains a family unit is, on average and on the whole, more likely to lead to development of more rounded and less damaged individuals. Having such an ethic usually extends to friends as well; both are friendly people that would do far more to help out a friend than I’ve seen in any number of other countries. It’s almost as though both the Indians and Italians took an extra swig from the cup of the milk of human kindness!

This leads me to my next point, the strong religious identity. In both nations there are strong female images of a powerful matriarch that deserves respect , giving an environment for respect for both women and elders. In the case of Italy this takes the form of Madonna, aka the Virgin Mary and in India there are a number of them such as Lakshmi, Parvati and Shakti.

Which unfortunately leads me to the more negative aspects of both countries; hypocritical undertones.

Because, whilst both countries parade these strong female icons, in practice the average female is treated in a very different manner, one that could be deemed as second class in comparison to that of males. In the case of Italy, it is a case of a female’s appearance being a very strong indication of their success in work and elsewhere (more so than other European nations). If that wasn’t enough, it is quite normal for a man to have an affair (not so much with the younger generation but it is still alive and well nonetheless) and he is considered this immensely virile hero, but the woman in the affair is thought of in a far less flattering light, to put it lightly. Also you don’t need me to tell you all about Berlusconi and his, shall we say dealings, with women.

In India, one could argue it’s a bit more sinister. Female infanticide is, as ever, the elephant in the room that no one wishes to talk about but it is a big issue regardless. Look at the sex ratio of the average Indian orphanage, it will tell you all you need to know. This of course stems from the lack of value of a girl within society, and her value decreases the more rural you go. Whilst in the big cosmopolitan centres this is starting to be addressed a lot more needs to be done. Despite this Delhi has somehow reached a legendary status within the country of how unsafe it is for women. So that’s one aspect they have in common. That’s right, this is just the beginning!

Another, slightly more well known aspect of both countries is the level of corruption, which is bordering on the endemic. This is a little more surprising in Italy, being an EU member and all but that doesn’t change the fact that it exists. And corruption is a way of life in India. There are very few things that can be done without some form of ‘persuasion’. I suppose it is more of an issue in the latter but there are countless examples of investigations that were incredibly lax in order to save someones face: Italian example: checking out the safety of the track at Imola after Ayrton Senna’s crash, Indian example: the long-winded case involving the Bofors scam. Not to mention the odd dealings at the top. With Italy it is clear; it is not possible to spend a day in Italy without lining the pockets of Berlusconi. In India, it is not so clear, but politicians have far too much clout with the media and interfere with government issues far too much. If you were to go on Wikipedia to look through the list of known government scams that have occurred in the last 50 years, the list alone would take a while to read.

Both countries have spent of lot of time being subjugated by outsiders and tried hard to maintain an identity. As a result both nations have very conservative outlooks and are not so keen on cultures/practices/most things from the outside. Anything construed as foreign is viewed with a great deal of suspicion. This primarily manifests itself in adopting new styles of management and law making, because eating different food and listening to exotic music is a poor indicator of that in my opinion. What it means is that change is unlikely to come easy as everyone is set in their ways. And so dodgy geezers at all levels are going to be hard to dislodge, because they’ve become traditions essentially.

Oh, and I suppose you could argue that both countries are run by an Italian. There. That’s the only other time I’m going to mention that…

So my brief guide into why India and Italy are the same country. I’ve tried to keep it positive – heavy, but it has to be said that there are a lot of unnverving aspects that can’t be ignored.

Regards,

The Vedic Underdog

Loving Thailand vs Loving Thailand

Recently I stumbled across a documentary about a Thai matrimonial agency that looked to pair up Thai girls with foreign (read Western) men. As you can imagine it’s down to money.

I remember seeing a similar documentary when I was a child and being absolutely disgusted by these vile overweight old men lusting after young pretty Thai girls. Though this is quite well known, isn’t it? I don’t’ need to go into the details about how horrible this is, I’m sure you’re aware of it.

I will point out though in the documentary I saw recently the matrimonial agency, when describing the merits of Thai women mentioned that they ‘don’t have the hang ups of equality driven Western women’ and ‘never get a headache.’ I mentally threw up reading that one.

Now you may say that the old men are doing these girls a favour by marrying them and taking them out of poverty and hardship, but my recent epiphany indicates a fallacy in this: if money is the issue how about helping them to work their way out of poverty????? Fund their education, build offices, buy their products if they work in a factory (if you’re stingy). That would show your real affection for Thai women, and it would come from the head and not your…well you can imagine what word goes there.

Someday I may just start up a charity to do so (but I need to find out how much school and university costs in Thailand). A big middle finger to all these vile perverts who wouldn’t stand a chance with these women if the playing field was more level. I could go on about my feelings towards these disgusting individuals but that would be counterproductive. Let’s just say if anyone tried it in my family, they would be treated in the manner fitting their vile superficiality and using the downstairs brain.

UPDATE: As I was writing this article I Googled any groups that are doing anything like the charity I want to set up, but several thai bride websites came up (annoyed grunt). However there is hope: I found a well known NGO called Development and Education Programme for Daughters and Communities (DEPDC), their website is:

http://www.depdc.org/index.htm

They’re looking to stop child prostitution, which is highly important, but is not quite what I want to fund. I suppose that people would gravitate towards this option if they were interested in bettering themselves rather than wealth but I will think about my foundation nonetheless just in case there are young women out there who feel that they have no option other than to partake in this ‘sanctimonious’ prostitution.

Regards,

The Vedic Underdog