Quote :

"I come from the largest most successful democracy in the world."

You know, aside from the basic idiocy this post presents, it's got me thinking...

I'm not gonna claim America is divine or some shit. But I think we forget 1776. We beat the fucking Britts. We beat them against all fucking odds. Then we joined fucking wars that weren't even ours, and we fucking won them. The US rules, and everyone else can fucking bite it. Nationalism to max right now yo.

[Edited on April 26, 2006 at 10:16 PM. Reason : fuck an edit]

4/26/2006 10:13:07 PM

we didnt have any help at all either

4/26/2006 10:14:05 PM

i like black porn...

4/26/2006 10:25:22 PM

Family is not even the issue. Sometimes you can't get along with someone with different morals, practices, expectations, etc. If you can make that work, however, then you are pretty much set. If your family doesn't like it, they can suck a dick.*



*Even this belief could be a cultural grand canyon -- the other person in the relationship could be brainwashed into thinking that family has something to do w/ the relationship. You're not going to change this level of belief.

[Edited on April 26, 2006 at 10:29 PM. Reason : sdfsdf]

4/26/2006 10:29:26 PM

Nothing about my statement was idiotic.

Where else can you find such a successful democracy

As many political parties and views as the languages spoken

Quote :

"we didnt have any help at all either"

neither did India. We have never received help from any Government, although the US has tried to meddle into the Kashmir politics since eternity and turned away.

[Edited on April 27, 2006 at 12:18 AM. Reason : .]

4/27/2006 12:17:23 AM

4/27/2006 12:20:49 AM

Quote :

"we didnt have any help at all either "

unless you meant to add the Gulf War, the Afghanistan War, and the ongoing Iraq War.

One good example of a war without help is the Vietnam War

[Edited on April 27, 2006 at 12:37 AM. Reason : ,]

4/27/2006 12:37:23 AM

uh that was sarcasm, we had help

4/27/2006 12:46:04 AM

I'm pretty sure JohnHGuth was being sarcastic.

Quote :

"I'm not gonna claim America is divine or some shit. But I think we forget 1776. We beat the fucking Britts. We beat them against all fucking odds. Then we joined fucking wars that weren't even ours, and we fucking won them. The US rules, and everyone else can fucking bite it. Nationalism to max right now yo."

I'm not claiming that India is the greatest democracy in the world, but you are greatly diminishing the struggle that Ghandi and Co. went through to gain India's dependence (and he didn't have to fire a shot).

4/27/2006 12:47:39 AM

Gandhi did not do it all alone.

The revolutionaries who died in the Independance struggle had A LOT to do with attaining freedom.

Gandhi frustrated the British

4/27/2006 12:49:01 AM

Wait, has this thread really descended into a battle for which country is "better", the U.S. vs India?

Such a discussion is idiotic in itself. It could only be more apples/oranges if India was on another planet.

Now, a personal opinion as to where one wishes to live is perfectly acceptable and one can declare why without failing.

For example, I love living in the U.S., our economic freedom is respected and our businesses are often too good at attending to my wants. Maybe Ultra prefers India for palatable reasons. Aparently BridgetSPK enjoys America because we won a few wars a long time ago. While this was better than losing these wars, I personally would have prefered these wars not be fought in the first place, would have to change history, but I digress. BobbyDigital obviously likes the people and institutions he has found in America, but didn't care for those he found in India. This is all anyone of us can say.

To attempt to compare Ghandi to some revolutionaries in another century is rediculous. All we can say is that it was the toughest thing they ever had to do in their lives (at least according to their biographers). Leave it there, I suggest.

4/27/2006 12:58:09 AM

I think most historians on this board just aren't that well read.

That's all I gotta say.

4/27/2006 1:01:19 AM

^ And I guarantee there is someone somewhere that would say the same about you.

4/27/2006 1:04:55 AM

I agree

that's why I didn't post much historic anecdotes in here.

The points about economic freedom and liberties are debatable though.

I am not making it a which is better country debate, but cmon there has to be some basis.

4/27/2006 1:06:09 AM

You can say lots of things. I feel reasonably confident when I say owning and operating a business in America requires less time and effort directed towards acquiring permits and permission than it does in India. I havn't personally done it, maybe you could enlighten me. I also feel reasonably confident when I say Americans earn more on a purchasing power parity basis than Indians.

But this doesn't make a country automatically better. Maybe you enjoy getting permits, maybe you feel all that industrial/commercial activity just spoils the wilderness. It doesn't necessarily even make it "more free" because maybe you prefer some freedoms over others, such as the freedom of your elected representatives to control the economy in leu of personal economic freedom. There are lots of people her in America that dislike economic freedom but at the same time hold political and social freedom most dear.

4/27/2006 1:16:10 AM

socialist bureaucracy

4/27/2006 1:18:42 AM

all you said is pure hearsay.

I wouldn't go off-topic any more here.

Let's talk about racism.

4/27/2006 1:19:25 AM

I think that was covered on the first page. Racism is evidently bad and everyone polled, except for you, seemed to feel their parents would support their decision to date interracially.

I suppose the next logical question is to ask why you, ultra, feel your parents would automatically be against it?

It is conceivable for someone to have interracial parents. As such, they may be unhappy if you do not marry outside your race like they did (whichever is closest at that point).

That said, it is often a pipe-dream to please both the parents' sides even when they are the same race/creed/etc. Hence all the jokes about bringing harm to one's mother-in-law. You can argue interracial makes it even less likely to please everyone, but since it seems nearly impossible to please everyone anyway, why bother sacrificing love where-ever you find it in a search for the nearly unobtainable?

4/27/2006 1:30:11 AM

I never once said that my parents would oppose my decision to marry inter-racially. In fact, I posted quite the contrary. So, without reading the rest of your rambling, I just gotta say that you're a fool.

4/27/2006 1:33:23 AM

Quote :

"Let me go ahead and step in here. Indians are, unequivocally, the most racist people on the planet. White people have nothing on Indians when it comes to racism. Indians hate anyone that is not like them even other indians of othher sub-ethnicities in India. This is the main reason that I, for the most part, reject my culture."

ultra, BobbyDigital is being genuine. Why are you ignoring and denying him?

[Edited on April 27, 2006 at 1:44 AM. Reason : sss]

4/27/2006 1:41:10 AM

fuck it, i read the rest of the rest of thread. everybody else wins!

4/27/2006 1:46:22 AM

What did I deny?

People are racist because of their upbringing. I am an Indian, and I am hardly racist.

At the same time I have met racist white people, not racist white people and racist Indians and not racist Indians.

What more is there to say?

4/27/2006 1:48:56 AM

Obviously it all comes down to the individual. But that is not to say that, in general, we can't characterize societies.

4/27/2006 1:54:34 AM

Everybody else wins!

4/27/2006 1:55:55 AM

In general, we are at the same level.

There were hate crime attempts on campuses throughout the US after 9/11.

Sikhs are still considered terrorists by IGNORANT people.

America still suffers from passive racism in important public positions.

There might be racial tensions in India

It's hard for me to generalize.

Perhaps, it is easier for you to do that.

Quote :

"Everybody else wins!"

Please don't post stupid remarks.

[Edited on April 27, 2006 at 1:57 AM. Reason : .]

[Edited on April 27, 2006 at 1:58 AM. Reason : .]

4/27/2006 1:56:26 AM

JonHGuth wins!

4/27/2006 2:12:25 AM

Quote :

"The US rules, and everyone else can fucking bite it. Nationalism to max right now yo."

WOOOOOOOOOOO


HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

4/27/2006 2:19:48 AM

see my parents are hypocrits

i bet i could marry a pretty indian chick like radhar, or a cute half korean chick like melissapat83, but if i married gumbyunc i would be shunned forever

to put it in tww terms i mean

4/27/2006 2:49:23 AM

I dunno about that, but I have been told by a small number of white girls that their parents feel that Indian guys are a good mate because they tend to be more faithful/work towards relationships.

Again, this is what I have been told by girls.

Maybe I am racist.

4/27/2006 2:54:05 AM

Quote :

"but I have been told by a small number of white girls that their parents feel that Indian guys are a good mate because they tend to be more faithful/work towards relationships"

how do you think that stereotype was engendered

4/27/2006 2:58:17 AM

Maybe divorce statistics...I have no idea, but I was surprised when I first heard that.

4/27/2006 3:00:29 AM

i'd be lying if i said it wasnt refreshing to hear that whites are not the most racist people on earth

4/27/2006 4:00:31 AM

Quote :

"There were hate crime attempts on campuses throughout the US after 9/11."

Yes. Compared with the relatively frequent hate crime attempts bombing successes in India, well...

I think perhaps a more important point is this: Yes, there are plenty of racists in the United States, but they are generally looked down upon, mocked, and reviled. They are recognized by the majority as a problem.

Nobody's ever going to purge themselves of all their idiots, but we can at least expect them to recognize those idiots. I don't see that happening on a similar scale in India -- you only need to look at the major opposition party.

Quote :

"It's hard for me to generalize. Perhaps, it is easier for you to do that."

This reasoning is bullshit.

Schindler was a member of the Nazi party. He was, by all accounts, a pretty decent fellow who worked hard to help people escape suffering at his own personal risk. Because there was one (and presumably other) good Nazis, does that mean we're not allowed to generalize the Nazi party as being shitty and worthy of annihilation?

Now, clearly there's more nonracist Indians than there were nonbastard Nazis, but where are you going to draw the line there?

I'm sick of this oversimplified "generalization = wrong" equation.

4/27/2006 4:09:13 AM

All bombing stories that you read about in the media are carried over by Islamic separatists from across the border. The hatred is not that of race (they are the same race), but rather political and religious.

Again, the major opposition party has nothing against race. Maybe you're trying to trivialize race with religion. Even then, the "major opposition party" has ideological views just like everyone else in the world, but still has a very large minority following/membership in its rosters. If views of a political party are pointers of "racism" then we can all conclude that since all democrats hate immigration, they are automatically racist. They are the "major opposition party" in the US, if not the only one.

What do you mean about "looked down upon, mocked, and reviled"? Where are the incidental anecdotes for that? All I read about is some sikh having to suffer discrimination, and then struggling to have the right to wear his turban legally, or other similar incidents. Also, are you saying that "racism" is openly supported in India/other parts of the world? Again, on what basis is that conclusion being drawn?

The major opposition party supported India's current "minority" President. Things in India aren't that gloomy as you make them out to be. Of course, I would love to hear about the "scale" of anti-racist movements in the US that you mentioned.

The second part of your comment is entirely dumb, typical message board Nazi argument. There is nothing of that sort existent in any part of the world, much less the world's most progressive democracy.

I could turn around your argument against you in "there's more nonracist Americans than there were nonbastard Nazis, but where are you going to draw the line there?"

Generalization is not wrong, however, in this case all you can go with is history and present. In the case of India, it has seen more racial mixing than probably even the US. And the history has been not as grim as that of the US.

It's not a who is better thing. The way I look at it, India has had only about 60 years of freedom, and has made rapid rapid strides and all the statistics are successively improving, be it poverty, income, GDP, FDI, exports, literacy, health care, and even the index of economic freedom. Can you same the same about a country which has had a much longer free stride, is a global superpower, and where the number of black people living under the poverty line has gone up every year for the last 5 years?

My argument stands. You cannot generalize racism. It is impossible.

4/27/2006 4:24:14 AM

Quote :

" Maybe you're trying to trivialize race with religion."

They're the same in every respect relevant to this discussion. The same mental processes motivate either kind of hate.

Quote :

"If views of a political party are pointers of "racism" then we can all conclude that since all democrats hate immigration, they are automatically racist."

No, to do that you'd have to demonstrate that hating immigration is racist (which it often is, I'll grant), and you'd have to have a party who made immigration one of their top issues.

Quote :

"All I read about is some sikh having to suffer discrimination, and then struggling to have the right to wear his turban legally, or other similar incidents."

Of course you do. Part of that's confirmation bias, and the rest is that you're simply more inclined to find and remember stories that are relevant to your particular situation as an Indian.

I'm saying ask ten people on the street if they think racists are a bunch of shitbags. If that's not specific enough, ask them if they think the kind of person to oppose marriage based on either party's race is a shitbag.

Quote :

"Also, are you saying that "racism" is openly supported in India/other parts of the world?"

Supported? Not exactly. I don't mean to act like there's any significant number of Indians or anyone else who are trying to kick out all the white people. I do think that it is perhaps a bit more tolerated in some other places than it is here (and possibly, more here than in still other places). If an Indian family opposes the interracial marriage of one of their own, do you think any significant part of the community would think less of that? Now substitute Americans there.

As to what I base it on, I've got my Indian friends (who are disturbingly numerous of late), all of whom have given me the clear impression that I'm not wrong in this regard: not many Indians would think less of one of their own for opposing an interracial marriage. Hell, they wouldn't think less of someone who opposed an intercaste marriage. It wasn't enough to cut people up into races, they had to cut those up into rigid social strata as well.

In America, sure, a lot of people might not mind such a person...but plenty of others would.

Quote :

"Things in India aren't that gloomy as you make them out to be."

I'm not trying to make them out to be gloomy. For fuck's sake, I'm immensely pleased with India. Regardless of what some of the libertarians and arch-conservatives on here are saying, I think the country has done incredible things in a short time. But it does have its drawbacks and they do need to be recognized.

Quote :

"The second part of your comment is entirely dumb, typical message board Nazi argument."

You can do the same thing with any other shitty group, but everyone knows the names "Schindler" and "Nazi," so I use that. I'm sure there's some repentant rapists out there. Doesn't mean I have to start saying, "Well, convicted rapists, we can't generalize them." Or use literally any other group of bad people on the planet. No matter which group, there's always going to be one or two good (or at least tolerably not-evil) apples in the bunch.

Overall, I give your effort to dodge the argument a D+.

Quote :

"I could turn around your argument against you in "there's more nonracist Americans than there were nonbastard Nazis, but where are you going to draw the line there?""

It's a lot easier from my position. For the standard of racism we seem to be using, I'll say that the line is at the halfway mark. When you've got more A than B, you're safe to generalize towards A -- ableit very slightly, and with more prefacing and qualification.

Quote :

"And the history has been not as grim as that of the US."

Are you fucking with me? When did the Partition become a walk in the g-ddamn park? And did we forget something in there about a sitting Prime Minister getting assassinated by an ethnic minority because of her perceived effort to oppress it?

And besides, you've got plenty of history ahead of you, and you ain't in the clear just yet.

Quote :

"In the case of India, it has seen more racial mixing than probably even the US."

Don't start trying to pull that shit with me. You yourself made the point that there aren't that many racial differences between Indians. Of those that are, many are quite minor. Yeah, you've got a lot of different sets of motherfuckers living side by side, and that they've done that without imploding is an accomplishment that I will not understate. Still, if you want "race" to mean "race," then you'd better use it as such.

Quote :

"Can you same the same about a country which has had a much longer free stride, is a global superpower, and where the number of black people living under the poverty line has gone up every year for the last 5 years?"

I'm not going to compare apples and oranges here. The differences between the two are, in this case, too vast to contemplate.

When America was formed, it was in the world's backwoods, with pitifully little infrastructure development, in an era of restricted trade, isolated from much of the world, and at a time when technology was very limited. It was also born out of a destructive war. India skipped the war, had an established framework of government already in place, at a time when technology allowed more rapid development and greater integration with the outside world. Our circumstances were different, and to try to even begin to compare rates of advancement is a pointless effort. I don't know what would have happened if our starting positions were reversed.

4/27/2006 5:20:06 AM

Quote :

"you'd have to have a party who made immigration one of their top issues. "

Kerry did in the last elections.

Quote :

"Part of that's confirmation bias, and the rest is that you're simply more inclined to find and remember stories that are relevant to your particular situation as an Indian."

What if I dig anecdotes about Arabs? They aren't Indians.

Quote :

"I'm saying ask ten people on the street if they think racists are a bunch of shitbags. If that's not specific enough, ask them if they think the kind of person to oppose marriage based on either party's race is a shitbag. "

Do the same on a street in India. Many people in this thread have already posted that a lot of Americans they know/knew rigorously opposed relationships with a different color.

Quote :

"If an Indian family opposes the interracial marriage of one of their own, do you think any significant part of the community would think less of that? Now substitute Americans there."

Yes, a lot would. But then, it is an entirely different ball-game when we talk about arranged marriages, that are still in the norm in most indian households. You don't go about soliciting relationships from people with a background that you don't ideologically agree with. In case of love or dating kind of relationships, the reaction would be similar to what you'd find in the US. Extreme hate or certian liking.

Quote :

"not many Indians would think less of one of their own for opposing an interracial marriage. Hell, they wouldn't think less of someone who opposed an intercaste marriage. It wasn't enough to cut people up into races, they had to cut those up into rigid social strata as well."

Again, depends on the kind of relationship between the couple. If the couple is in love, and an urban family opopses it, yes, they would be thought less about. Same goes for Americans. How do you know they would ALL react in the way you want them to react in this situation? Also, makes me wonder, how familiar are your Indian friends with their own culture? I ask this because this is the number one issue I face with Indians that have visited their country once in 10 years/been brought up here. Their parents are unable to teach their kids anything about their origins just because the kids want to be rebels.

Intercaste marriages are very very common, and I know so many people that had Hindu/Muslim inter-religion marriages, even.

Quote :

"But it does have its drawbacks and they do need to be recognized."

Yep, and that is evident by the social change I experience every time I visit India.

Quote :

"I give your effort to dodge the argument a D+."

It was a non-argument

Quote :

"For the standard of racism we seem to be using, I'll say that the line is at the halfway mark. When you've got more A than B, you're safe to generalize towards A -- ableit very slightly, and with more prefacing and qualification."

And what precisely is the standard we're using? How do we know that there're more of A than Bs when I think there are in fact more of Bs than As. Hence, I give you an F.

Quote :

"When did the Partition become a walk in the g-ddamn park? And did we forget something in there about a sitting Prime Minister getting assassinated by an ethnic minority because of her perceived effort to oppress it?"

Partition wasn't a race issue. Even then, more Muslims stayed back in India than those who migrated back. True, it was the bloodiest human migration in the history of mankind, but it was very political. It could have been avoided - maybe.

The sitting PM was assassinated by her bodyguards. They wanted to take revenge for her dictator like activities during her tenure, and also for things she did. I am not commenting on whether they were justified or not, but it says nothing about the entire nation's feelings. I mean a similar argument could be made that JFK was assassinated because he didn't like slavery (although we don't know why he was in the first place). Doesn't say anything about the nation's outlook at all.

Quote :

"Yeah, you've got a lot of different sets of motherfuckers living side by side, and that they've done that without imploding is an accomplishment that I will not understate. Still, if you want "race" to mean "race," then you'd better use it as such."

You better be kidding, but if not, I suggest you read http://www.athelstane.co.uk/tchodson/ind_ethn/ind_ethn.htm#q020

Indians are a mixture of at least 7 races.

Quote :

"It was also born out of a destructive war. India skipped the war,"

I assume you mean the Second World War. True, India's army was Britain's army at that time, but more than 2 million people served in the war through the Indian Army at the time, of which more than 70,000 were killed. They also fought in Africa, Egypt, Italy, etc.

Quote :

"Our circumstances were different, and to try to even begin to compare rates of advancement is a pointless effort."

I totally agree, but if you read carefully, I was comparing the trends in the present day. Just look at poverty and hunger statistics for both countries. Not numbers, but trends.

4/27/2006 5:53:00 AM

Quote :

"And I am not hating on anyone. I am just going by what I see around me. All these non-FOB Indian kids are about white chicks. So I guess you could call them racist, but in the end it's because they wanna rebel against their first generation parents, making them unhappy in the process."

Obviously you have a very limited scope of what you "see around you." You could argue that I'm just rebelling against my first generation parents by marrying a white girl. But my Dad's oldest brother married a black woman. Three of my older first cousins married non-indians (two white, one black), so I'm hardly blazing new trails within my family.

Quote :

" Also, it is very hard to make inter-racial marriages work if you wanna please both the parents' sides. "

You have absolutely no way of knowing that, except for the fact that you know how bigoted most Indians are. I'm lucky enough to not have parents like that. She calls my parents 'mom' and 'dad' and i do the same with hers. It's people like you who can't see past skin color who make these things fail.

BTW, have your parents started putting ads in various newspapers to find you a wife yet, or are you not making enough money yet to be marry-able? Another fine facet of Indian culture-- unabashed materialism and snobbery.

4/27/2006 9:04:13 AM

Quote :

"BobbyDigital obviously likes the people and institutions he has found in America, but didn't care for those he found in India. "

That is not at all what I said.

4/27/2006 9:05:02 AM

Quote :

"Just look at poverty and hunger statistics for both countries"

Oh, so 99% of India's poverty stricken households own at least one color television set, 2/3 have air-conditioning, 60% own a computer, 85% own their own car, 99.2% own a refrigerator?

Wow, I had no idea India too suffered from America's form of poverty.

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/invest/extra/P140067.asp

[Edited on April 27, 2006 at 9:15 AM. Reason : link]

4/27/2006 9:13:52 AM

Quote :

"Aparently BridgetSPK enjoys America because we won a few wars a long time ago. While this was better than losing these wars, I personally would have prefered these wars not be fought in the first place, would have to change history, but I digress. BobbyDigital obviously likes the people and institutions he has found in America, but didn't care for those he found in India. This is all anyone of us can say."

When you use those words, you're almost always wrong. And you sound like a sassy bitch...

4/27/2006 10:16:10 AM

Quote :

"Obviously you have a very limited scope of what you "see around you." You could argue that I'm just rebelling against my first generation parents by marrying a white girl. But my Dad's oldest brother married a black woman. Three of my older first cousins married non-indians (two white, one black), so I'm hardly blazing new trails within my family."

I really don't know what you're trying to argue over here. I didn't even know that you have a white wife or intend to have one. Unless you have some authoritative research trends on the issue, I have to assume that what you have to say about "bigoted Indians" comes from what you "see around you", or your personal experiences. There is no way for me to verify that just like you would want to believe that there's no way to verify my hypothesis. Does your family have anything against Indian girls (seeing the family history you posted), or is it just that Indian girls are not good enough? I mean, I understand that you're trying to say that you're not a rebel, rather just following family custom (?), but how does it help strengthen your argument that Indians are the most racist people on this earth?

Quote :

"You have absolutely no way of knowing that, except for the fact that you know how bigoted most Indians are. I'm lucky enough to not have parents like that. She calls my parents 'mom' and 'dad' and i do the same with hers. It's people like you who can't see past skin color who make these things fail."

Just as you have no way of knowing that every inter-racial marital relationship will be accepted fully by EVERY such family involved. I am glad you don't have prejudiced parents, just like I am glad to have extremely understanding and liberal parents. I don't know how you got that I "can't see past skin color". It would be a stupid argument to say that American parents don't warn their kids of dating someone of a different race. Lots of people in this thread and elsewhere have already said that inter-racial relationships are not WIDELY accepted in the US to this day and age. Isn't that bigoted?

Quote :

"BTW, have your parents started putting ads in various newspapers to find you a wife yet, or are you not making enough money yet to be marry-able? Another fine facet of Indian culture-- unabashed materialism and snobbery."

No, my parents have not started putting ads in various newspapers and websites yet. Am I making enough money to be "marry-able"? I believe yes. I don't know about which culture is more materialistic, but then just cuz you have had bad experiences (?), definitely gives you the freedom to be bitter. Nothing wrong with that. I would say that most American marriages are materialistic as I have never heard of a pre-nup being so important elsewhere in well-to-do households. It's all about what you wish to prejudice yourself with.

But, like I said, no matter what your prejudices, everyone else is still going to look at you and call you a darkie. That's how things work. Reminds me of that episode on tyra (?) where a black woman kept calling other black people obnoxious, and that she was not black. It just doesn't compute.

4/27/2006 11:22:41 AM

Indians are in general incredibly ethnocentric, and some are even racist. I think any social group that is somehow identified as unique, acts the same. Be it a tigh knit WASP community in Boston (a group that calls themselves the Boston Brahmins), a chapter of Kappa Sigs, or a neighborhood of Jews in Yonkers. Its unfortunate, but everybody displays this behaviour.

Indians are definitely are materialistic, but i think most people in this country are. even i have a few shirts with animals on them.

my folks are fairy edumacated, and are not much of either (there is some correlation).

in my extended family we have through interracial marriages (withough counting kids), 5 whites and 1 puerto rican, and 1 black person pending (engaged i think).


however this one time an uncle told me:

"there are three absolutes in life. don't drink and drive, don't end up having to pay child support, and don't bring home a BMW."

i was all, "yeah german cars are both overpriced and less reliable than japanese cars"

he says, "no, i mean don't bring home a Black, Muslim, or White woman."

i was like "WTF mate!"

he says, "the White and Black women will leave you, and the Muslim's family will blow your house up."

i was like " "


little did he recall, we've had 3 divorces in the history of our extended family. all 3 were Indian on Indian marriages in America.


...i think people are just averse to situations that are unfamiliar to them. its human nature.

4/27/2006 11:37:18 AM

Yea, BridgetSPK, BobbyDigital, sorry about that, just ignore that post. I was not in my right mind at that time of night and hope you forgive the offense.

4/27/2006 11:37:47 AM

Hey, how many people of indian descent do we have on this board!?!?

I count: ssjamind, ultra, BobbyDigital, and moron.

Did I miss/misslabel any? Thanks!

[Edited on April 27, 2006 at 11:45 AM. Reason : .,.]

4/27/2006 11:44:48 AM

Quote :

"Kerry did in the last elections."

Quite simply, no, he didn't.

Quote :

"What if I dig anecdotes about Arabs?"

Then they'll all show the same amount of bias as they did before, except now it'll all be one kind of bias and it will be blatantly intentional and thus worse.

Quote :

"Also, makes me wonder, how familiar are your Indian friends with their own culture?"

I saw this one coming a mile away. "Oh, those Indians, they aren't really very good Indians. I am, though."

Truth be told, their situations vary. Some were born here, some immigrated early, some much later. None of them, though, strike me as particularly rebellious against their parents, though I can certainly see that happenning. Most of them, far as I can tell, see the whole parental displeasure as something to be avoided, not poked with a stick.

Quote :

"And what precisely is the standard we're using?"

The thread started off about interracial marriage and people's opinions thereof, so that's what I've been running with. If we went with something awfully lax, "Racism = thinking anything different at all about different races," then damn near everybody would qualify and the conversation would be moot. If it was so strict as, "Racism = attempting genocide," then so few people would qualify that it would, again, be moot. But as far as a noticeable sentiment towards other races that hinders integration and social interaction, yeah, I'd say we can work with that.

Quote :

"Partition wasn't a race issue."

That's good, because we weren't talking about race, we were talking about "grim history."

Whether it was racial, political, or aovidable doesn't matter. Shit was grim as hell.

Quote :

"The sitting PM was assassinated by her bodyguards."

She was assassinated by Sikh bodyguards for her perceived oppression during a Sikh uprising.

And what it says about the nations feelings don't fucking matter. I was responding to a statement by you -- that India had some shiny, happy history compared to the US. Now, unless a minority group getting oppressed and then shooting a PM is shiny and happy, quit with these other lines.

Quote :

"I mean a similar argument could be made that JFK was assassinated because he didn't like slavery"

I'm talking to a guy who can't tell JFK from Abraham Lincoln. I can't believe it.

Quote :

"Indians are a mixture of at least 7 races."

Sure, but exactly how different are these races? I'll save you the trouble: not terribly.

Quote :

"True, India's army was Britain's army at that time, but more than 2 million people served in the war through the Indian Army at the time"

No thanks to Ghandi. But, at any rate, that's not the point: WWII, for India, was primarily a foreign war, which by nature is far less destructive than one fought at home -- like what the Americans had in the Revolution. India may have lost many of its sons, yeah, but by and large the country itself wasn't that torn up.

Quote :

"Just look at poverty and hunger statistics for both countries."

You're going to look at a few years and call it a "trend?" I can't wait to have this conversation when India's bubble temporarily bursts (which is inevitable).

4/27/2006 12:02:09 PM

+sugarrush4u, she posted in this thread

there are others on TWW

4/27/2006 12:02:58 PM

Man, grumpygop, you have lost it. You're resorting to baseless personal attacks now. Yup, you're right, I know nothing about JFK or Lincoln, or how JFK had to consider promoting civil rights movement later on.

Kerry had immigration as one of his election issues. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kerry_presidential_campaign,_2004

Also, I never said that those Indians aren't "good Indians". That's your own inference. Again, your inference depends on, and I quote, "as far as I can tell". Which basically tells me that, in your own words, "all show the same amount of bias as they did before, except now it'll all be one kind of bias and it will be blatantly intentional and thus worse". We aren't getting anywhere, cuz it's so stupid to say that MOST Indians are racists or MOST Americans are racists. We don't have actual trends.

As long as we're talking about grim history, slavery is grim. How many US presidents have been assassinated? How many of those mysteries solved? How many black/female presidents/Vice Presidents? Let's not even get there.

So, if a group of 3 gunmen shooting down a PM represents the entire minorty group feeling opressed, I guess I could say the same thing about all the US historical anecdotes, and then you'd dodge every point and come back with some other circular argument.

How different were the 7+ races? I suggest you read what I posted. I'll save you the trouble: a hell lot, both physiologically, as well as culturally.

It's spelled Gandhi. I don't even know where you're going with the "war wasn't fought at home" bit. It doesn't matter. We had more than a couple wars fought at home with our Eastern and Western neighbors, and we liberated an entire nation. Do you mean India wasn't "torn up" infrastructurally? Well, yeah, the British took care of that!

Call it a bubble or anything, all you gotta do is visit the US Census Bureau website.

4/27/2006 12:22:46 PM

Quote :

"Kerry had immigration as one of his election issues."

Everyone always has immigration as one of their issues. But was it one of the big ones? No. Not even close.

Quote :

"slavery is grim. How many US presidents have been assassinated? How many of those mysteries solved? How many black/female presidents/Vice Presidents? Let's not even get there."

In order:

So is the caste system. Four over the course of more than two hundred years. In just sixty India's managed to kill one executive and a founding father, so I'd say you'll catch up. Even if you want to assume the most batshit crazy scenarios, the answer is "all but one." And we haven't had any black or female presidents -- never mind that the parliamentary system of government lends itself to that sort of thing more than a Presidential one.

Quote :

"So, if a group of 3 gunmen shooting down a PM represents the entire minorty group feeling opressed"

It doesn't, and I didn't mean to imply as much. But there was a PM betrayed by bodyguards over an ethnic conflict, which is pretty fucking traumatic. I mean, we had a roughly analagous deal with Lincoln, but the difference is that I'll freely admit it rather than try to sidestep/cover it up in conversation.

Quote :

"I don't even know where you're going with the "war wasn't fought at home" bit. It doesn't matter. We had more than a couple wars fought at home with our Eastern and Western neighbors"

There's a difference between born literally as the result of a war, and then fighting one later. We had our share of early conflicts here. 1812 wasn't a fucking cricket match.

I don't know why you're even pressing this. The war thing is an advantage that India had. There are other advantages that America had. Because each one had different starting places, we can't compare -- didn't you yourself agree to that last post?

Quote :

"Call it a bubble or anything, all you gotta do is visit the US Census Bureau website."

Yeah, and all you gotta do is have a brain in your head and see that eventually, if perhaps temporarily, India's conditions will worsen -- and I'll wager that they'll do so much more steeply than the relatively minor hiccups you see in the United States.

Poverty's gone up in recent years. Fine. It will go back down.

And that's to say nothing of the difference between American-style poverty and that of some other countries, India included.

4/27/2006 12:50:24 PM

Circular arguments all the way

4/27/2006 12:53:46 PM

if you all havent figured out esgargs is mad that he is indian and will try to turn every thread into a debate about how his country is so awesome

its fun to argue with him and call him names, but serious responses are a waste of time

4/27/2006 1:04:36 PM