Hindu caste system in different point of view

[Suriya]

@AUSTERLITZ @Nilgiri @Joe Shearer

 

[Nilgiri]

@AUSTERLITZ @Nilgiri @Joe Shearer

Exactly the kind of debate I would have with my dad...and we would come to understanding that concept of caste/varna has been grossly distorted for the use of politics in kaliyug (but it was foretold it would happen given rise of ego and deterioration of human spirit).

Testament to that personally is my grandfather (on mother's side) who grew in poverty (sometimes going hungry for many days as a kid) and on father's side there was no real wealth like current TN political parties would have you believe in their identity politics propaganda.

What is elder and existing is always a ripe scapegoat for what wants to take power quickly. Such is the situation everywhere in world....the complex is just even more intense in India because of the sustained pilfering and destruction by foreigners for centuries now...who are given more of a pass (because it would not do good for the power grabbers to have attention focused there and some balanced debate)...heck they (power grabber clique) followed the same system of divide and rule for same purpose of exploitation by use of within easy reach scapegoats.

 

[Joe Shearer]

@AUSTERLITZ @Nilgiri @Joe Shearer

I watched the video with great attention and sincerely. What point did you want to make?

An unconnected observation: the quality of the English rendering, the sub-titles, is very bad. I followed the Hindi discourse exclusively, once the discrepancy became too annoying.

 

[Nilgiri]

the quality of the English rendering, the sub-titles, is very bad. I followed the Hindi discourse exclusively, once the discrepancy became too annoying.

I always ignore subtitles...they tend to be terrible or have agenda.

 

[Mamluk]

Different points of view not needed. Just get rid of it already!!

 

[prashantazazel]

It has no positive aspects in current day. It perpetuates backwardness in the country.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I always ignore subtitles...they tend to be terrible or have agenda.

The actual discourse itself was frightful. This was as good or as bad as Gurumurthy I-am-a-Bharata-Natyam-dancer economics. I was worried after listening to the Sankaracharya (who has a pretty spotty record); is the quality of this discourse the underpinning of the defence of the caste system and of the primitive approach to the question of Scheduled Caste and Dalit access to temples? Do people now understand the mindset that claims superiority to the constitution and to the rule of law and of the constitutional apparatus, and what this implies for the Ayodhya matter? and for a thousand other issues besides?

 

[Nilgiri]

is the quality of this discourse the underpinning of the defence of the caste system and of the primitive approach to the question of Scheduled Caste and Dalit access to temples?

If the post 1947 govt really cared about it, there would be no splitting of population into Scheduled Caste, Dalit etc...but simply are you economically disadvantaged or are you not (for addressal of absolute poverty - which we can then debate on best conduits for doing so).

Govt interference into social situation ends up long term hurting it...always and inevitably (worldwide). Because a govt is simply not nuanced enough (you want an example in North America?....look at the KKK and which righteous social justice party spawned it, grew it and used it for strong-arming...but wants you to forget that today).

It is an instrument to be used very sparingly and where it has proven itself in history (say national defense, provision of courts and standards)....because it will always tend towards an approach of "guilty till proven innocent" when there is power at stake and scapegoats are easily accessible. You use dull blunt weapons where dull blunt weapons actually work, you dont use them on microscopic surgery that first needs enough healing and strength-gain (capital and wealth accumulation) to happen first on the ICU patient.

Social change comes from within a society....not from the barrel of a gun. It is no coincidence that for post-"independence" India....mass education program was totally ignored at any significant practical/pragmatic level by the political dynasty that became the new masters of India.

So yes there is definite need to question the narratives deeply and thoroughly perpetrated by this big nepotism loving dynasty and its lingering long term stench embedded everywhere....simply given their motives and results. There is root of some truths there too....but they actually have to be sorted from the mass-debris pushed alongside it in the lust for absolute power and control.

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

Different points of view not needed. Just get rid of it already!!

Just get rid of all Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, Brahmans and it will die.

 

[Joe Shearer]

If the post 1947 govt really cared about it, there would be no splitting of population into Scheduled Caste, Dalit etc...but simply are you economically disadvantaged or are you not (for addressal of absolute poverty - which we can then debate on best conduits for doing so).

With the greatest respect, I could no disagree with you more. You and I are not in the best position to decry positive affirmation; we are inheritors of the advantages of the social order. But that is not an absolute, it is a relative; we are not in the best position, but it is open to you and to me to discuss the issue.

We first need to take on board the obvious truth that the situation within Hindu society is not one on par with other world situations, and that being disadvantaged is far deeper than being poorer due to being disadvantaged. The situation is that the Dalit is subjected to horrible social barriers quite apart from economic barriers; how do rules for determining poverty, absolute poverty and economical disadvantages correct that situation?

Take the discourse by that crusty barnacle, the grossly regressive Shankaracharya; how does government regulation allowing greater access to education or to employment correct this dreadful lot from determining rules for expression and exercise of religious faith, and excluding whomever they want to exclude, subject to no rules, no determination but their own? Did you hear the firm finality of his tone when he intoned the position that exclusion could be subdivided infinitely, and also that these rules were not final in any way but were possible to be put together based on an informal symposium of the privileged speaking within a cloud of obscurity and fog?

No finely honed system for determining what constitutes poverty, absolute poverty, relative poverty and their like can reverse these millennium-spanning social crimes.

Govt interference into social situation ends up long term hurting it...always and inevitably (worldwide). Because a govt is simply not nuanced enough (you want an example in North America?....look at the KKK and which righteous social justice party spawned it, grew it and used it for strong-arming...but wants you to forget that today).

Very well. What would you put in its place?

I say this to underline the fact that no situation in the world - not one - equals the one that we contemplate on a daily basis if we live in India. Citing the example of the situation in the US that was at that time less than two hundred years old is rather disingenuous.

It is an instrument to be used very sparingly and where it has proven itself in history (say national defense, provision of courts and standards)....because it will always tend towards an approach of "guilty till proven innocent" when there is power at stake and scapegoats are easily accessible. You use dull blunt weapons where dull blunt weapons actually work, you dont use them on microscopic surgery that first needs enough healing and strength-gain (capital and wealth accumulation) to happen first on the ICU patient.

Remind me once again the implication of calling a segment of the free, independent socially mobile American society the 1%?

Social change comes from within a society....not from the barrel of a gun. It is no coincidence that for post-"independence" India....mass education program was totally ignored at any significant practical/pragmatic level by the political dynasty that became the new masters of India.

Ah, now we come to the Moral Rearmament aspect of the situation. It does seem rather obvious and quite easy when we contemplate the possibilities. It is a mystery that Gandhi failed totally in his parallel effort.

So yes there is definite need to question the narratives deeply and thoroughly perpetrated by this big nepotism loving dynasty and its lingering long term stench embedded everywhere....simply given their motives and results. There is root of some truths there too....but they actually have to be sorted from the mass-debris pushed alongside it in the lust for absolute power and control.

How stupid of me not to have guessed that the damage is done by one family over - what? a hundred years of dynastic rule?

Please @Nilgiri , you can do better than this drivel!

Just get rid of all Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, Brahmans and it will die.

We should start by getting rid of Suvarna Teja and all such false-flagged nuisances.

 

[GHALIB]

Just get rid of all Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, Brahmans and it will die.

So you want to remove poverty by killing wealthy people.

 

[Nilgiri]

With the greatest respect, I could no disagree with you more.

Why do you think I am even conversing with you? I'm not here in this forum for platitudes of agreement

It is why I dont really post much in places where everyone nods and agrees with me either. Not really my cup of tea.

I could have easily just ignored this whole thread tbh....but this issue rankles me quite a great deal....that everything should just fit into a cookie cutter mold of oppressor and oppressed....and that those that are truly the greatest oppressors in reality are the ones pushing that narrative down everyones throat....and few question it....and they get away with it.

You and I are not in the best position to decry positive affirmation

Well no one is. I don't dispute that. We as a people largely inherit in the grander social construct what we created...by the actions of millions and billions....so of course just one in the multitude could never speak for it all from some perceived vantage point or perspective.

I am just lending what my voice is to this issue (that old-caste has been used as both bogeyman and scapegoat politically for a bunch of kleptomaniacs drunk on power that are effectively neo-casteist, precisely because they want to usurp the old edifice for a new one that puts and keeps them at the top...rather than any sustained logical, rational benevolence)....and people can take it for what its worth. If they rather stick to the default, politically correct narrative, thats their choice to do so as well.

we are inheritors of the advantages of the social order.

I certainly am not....not in the way the caste-bogey people have gotten to power spewing about. At best both sides of family in my case knew value of education...but during formative time of early-mid 20th century India...my lot were quite poor, even dreadfully so...we inherited nothing (except increasing loathing and hate thrown our way thanks to the bogeyman-narrative building up) and worked for everything we have now.

We first need to take on board the obvious truth that the situation within Hindu society is not one on par with other world situations, and that being disadvantaged is far deeper than being poorer due to being disadvantaged.

The other disadvantages only even enter the picture (much less get tackled effectively) when you focus on economic upliftment first and foremost. Absolute poverty is terrible and affects a great wretched toll on the psychology of people....I can show you a multitude of studies regarding this....or why the "enlightenment" even happened in the west pragmatically only during the industrial revolution.

Yet we expect people in such squalor to engage effectively on the intermixing of history, philosophy and worth of education throughout the ages and express a nuanced and sustained political choice on it? This was exactly why education was deliberately shut up by both the British and their lackeys that took over in 47....and convenient bogeymen found for explaining away the condition caused by that and new ripe targets to deflect hostility to as well.

You can continue to do like crap but at least you now have the "freedom" to be angry at the historical "oppressors" (who we the neo-clique label) about it....keep voting for more of the same (rather than query what it is that causes poverty and ignorance and address that)! After all misdirected hostility and sowing of division based on it....has such a sparing use worldwide in politics historically.

how does government regulation allowing greater access to education or to employment

Theres an oxymoron if I ever saw one. Govt regulation allowing greater access to something? The very word regulate has a meaning right? There should be govt deregulation on all of it (access wise). What the govt should focus on are upholding good rule of law and courts.....not regulating (i.e intervening to "share" limited supply that it creates).

orrect this dreadful lot from determining rules for expression and exercise of religious faith, and excluding whomever they want to exclude, subject to no rules, no determination but their own?

Thats what laws and law enforcement is about. Put the investment and institution over there....not the dumb blame narrative based on winner takes all delusion.

But good rule of law has also been thrown to the wayside by the neo-casteist clique that took over after the British. From the get go the constitution was framed to be overly complicated and humongous for this very reason I suspect, instead of something simple and direct concerning what human rights are (especially inherent ones) and clearly defined role of the govt.

No finely honed system for determining what constitutes poverty, absolute poverty, relative poverty and their like can reverse these millennium-spanning social crimes.

I'm not talking about the full "reversing" of it. I'm talking about giving a basic chance to reversing it....rather than get stuck in quagmire of creating a myriad of ever increasing identity politics through abhorrent things like Mandal Commission. That has always been the elimination of absolute poverty (the kind of poverty where you cant even think straight because you are literally wasting away). Yet there was some blind application of exactly what you describe "a finely honed system"....except its only benefactors are politicians who can pit groups against each other using any narrative of their fancy (because who actually researches and reads the history well and in a neutral way with ample debate?)

Very well. What would you put in its place?

Limited govt...maximum (well defined) rule of law....at least the maximum striving for that. Instead the exact opposite was put into place.

I say this to underline the fact that no situation in the world - not one - equals the one that we contemplate on a daily basis if we live in India. Citing the example of the situation in the US that was at that time less than two hundred years old is rather disingenuous.

Well every country is unique. I am not saying the US or any other country at some point "translates" over into anything resembling congruence....all I am saying is that big govt intervention (especially in parallel with its closely related cousins - extrajudicial strong arming + identity politicking propaganda) has a lingering and omnipresent theme in the whole world. It should be strictly avoided....there was plenty of hindsight already available regarding this in the 1947 - 1950 timeframe (heck WW2 and all the causes for it was just a few years before).

The wrong decisions were made, and now we have to fix it slowly and correct it. But it takes a sustained effort in first openly debating each and every narrative taken as "unquestionable" during the monolithic political period of 1950 - 1990.

Remind me once again the implication of calling a segment of the free, independent socially mobile American society the 1%?

Continued exacerbation of the identity politics over there? This is not a problem at its root unique to India (or any country). It is why I come to this with somewhat different perspective.

Ah, now we come to the Moral Rearmament aspect of the situation. It does seem rather obvious and quite easy when we contemplate the possibilities. It is a mystery that Gandhi failed totally in his parallel effort.

Well Gandhi made a bunch of mistakes...but I really don't blame him all that much (with regards to this) given he was pretty much fixed on the political independence of the country as his overarching goal.

I have a feeling he could have done everything absolutely correct...and we would have still a lot of the issues we are grappling with at the same severity (because its far more complicated as to why).

What was needed (in hindsight) was the first few political leaders of independent India to focus on education and rule of law as priorities for the social program side....both of these were squandered and instead muddied with a multitude of other things and the first overarching thing that surfaced was quite poisonous (the blame game narrative for easy politics) much like the churning of the ocean of milk in the mythology. Im holding out still for the long term product...we are finding our way....so we need not be dissuaded or dejected. Even the people that made mistakes that I blame whatever for...I am quite empathetic to overall....there is purpose and meaning to it all.

How stupid of me not to have guessed that the damage is done by one family over - what? a hundred years of dynastic rule?

You made me chuckle...good job my friend.

It is more of a label I use for the larger clique/bureaucracy I have been going on about here...look its a phase we are mostly over now and have to learn from...but we need to discuss what the narratives sustained during that period (specifically for the politics) openly and deeply...so we can find something better and more rational to work with. Sharing what little you have (as substitute for growing it bigger) and divide and rule ...both brought on purpose by the powers that be (for maximum control through maximum dependency)....are in rear-view mirror increasingly. Its time to move on.

Every society in the world stratifies, it is human nature, its in our larger psyche. We are imperfect beings who in our ego build civilisations in first place. The basic issue will never go away (simply new labels and structures occupy the old ones over time). Unless you change us to not be human (which Das Kapital and other such big absolute govt works dream about)....but that is another debate altogether.

So with that in mind we should rather focus on the larger picture of propelling capital, education (Esp critical thinking) and our greater destiny....rather than bickering over who the bogeyman was....because it will always be those that are smallest in number and easiest to pick on....think about it. That is a very bad precedent to set for down the road when we are powerful enough (and can actually lay much larger hurt on both ourselves and others).

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

We should start by getting rid of Suvarna Teja and all such false-flagged nuisances.

I am no false flag. I was banned on this forum but you were never.

Now who is who is very apparent. Isn't it?

So you want to remove poverty by killing wealthy people.

You can either kill the poor or kill the rich.

Either way poverty would be removed.

But there are only 20% rich and 80% poor. So which one is more easy?

 

[GHALIB]

I am no false flag. I was banned on this forum but you were never.

Now who is who is very apparent. Isn't it?



You can either kill the poor or kill the rich.

Either way poverty would be removed.

But there are only 20% rich and 80% poor. So which one is more easy?

Eliminate poverty not poor or rich .

 

[Joe Shearer]

Fair enough. There is no question that this is the most rational that a defence of what I consider indefensible can get.

Why do you think I am even conversing with you? I'm not here in this forum for platitudes of agreement

It is why I dont really post much in places where everyone nods and agrees with me either. Not really my cup of tea.

I could have easily just ignored this whole thread tbh....but this issue rankles me quite a great deal....that everything should just fit into a cookie cutter mold of oppressor and oppressed....and that those that are truly the greatest oppressors in reality are the ones pushing that narrative down everyones throat....and few question it....and they get away with it.

Perhaps this is not intentional. Perhaps this type-casting is the result of the inevitable simplification that arises during an exposition of views on complex subjects.

Before going further, from what I have understood you to be saying, this is what I believe you mean when you use some of those terms above. I will move on to try and understand your arguments, and, if I understand them, to try and respond meaningfully, based on my prior understanding of the terms.

Oppressor (cookie cutter version) : Brahmins and upper caste Hindus in general, most particularly the religious among them.
Oppressed (cookie cutter version) : The Dalit, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes....there are more, but these are primary.
'...Truly the greatest oppressors in reality' :
Not clear. Perhaps

1. Broadly those who advocate a rejection of existing sanctions and taboos promulgated by a narrow set of privileged members of society, appointed arbiters of social norms and examiners of these existing sanctions and taboos by themselves;
2. Ambedkar and his political heirs who advocated affirmative action to ameliorate the lot of those brutalised for centuries;
3. Among that constellation of heirs, the Congress party in particular, in its various editions through the ages;
4. Within the Congress party, the dominating Nehru-Gandhi family in particular, whose presence seems to enrage the advocates of the status quo more than anyone else.

It is not clear which of these you are referring to, and perhaps one should depend on the context.

Well no one is. I don't dispute that.

I meant specifically the two of us, assuming that we are both upper-caste Hindus; in your case, I assume that you are a Tamilian Brahmin, and that enjoys both privileges and disabilities beyond the ordinary. My case is decidedly less salient, except in a context that you have raised later.

We as a people largely inherit in the grander social construct what we created...by the actions of millions and billions....so of course just one in the multitude could never speak for it all from some perceived vantage point or perspective.

I didn't mean that, but you are right: no individual can represent anything more than his or her own personal opinion.

On the other hand, my original sense stands valid, that we cannot, either of the two individuals that we are, or both, singly and collectively, speak about affirmative action with legitimacy. We do not know what it brings, we do not know what it was like without such action, we do not know what it was like for those who obtained it, so we cannot stand on the sidelines, look at our own positions, and comment on that programme.

I am just lending what my voice is to this issue (that old-caste has been used as both bogeyman and scapegoat politically for a bunch of kleptomaniacs drunk on power that are effectively neo-casteist, precisely because they want to usurp the old edifice for a new one that puts and keeps them at the top...rather than any sustained logical, rational benevolence)....and people can take it for what its worth. If they rather stick to the default, politically correct narrative, thats their choice to do so as well.

By all means, let us rattle the bars of the cage.

However, it would help enormously to know who is the target, who is this 'bunch of kleptomaniacs drunk on power that are effectively neo-casteist, precisely because they want to usurp the old edifice for a new one that puts and keeps them at the top'. Your statements do not make that clear; on one shift of the kaleidoscope, it looks like social reformers and politically inclined social reformers in particular, all over the country up to and including Assam, but no others. On the next shift, we seem to see the Dravidian parties, your own particular betes noire.

Before we can ill-treat you by ignoring you and sticking to the beaten path, we would like to know why we are ill-treating you.

I certainly am not....not in the way the caste-bogey people have gotten to power spewing about. At best both sides of family in my case knew value of education...but during formative time of early-mid 20th century India...my lot were quite poor, even dreadfully so...we inherited nothing (except increasing loathing and hate thrown our way thanks to the bogeyman-narrative building up) and worked for everything we have now.

Unless you are a Wedgewood-Benn, or a Hogg, or a Douglas-Home, you are not really in a position to disclaim your status, especially not if you have assumed the thread and been given the Gayatri.

You mention the value of education. You are preaching to the choir. In our part of the country, my lot was famous (infamous, in certain contexts) for putting education on top of their social objectives. They had no choice, since the Brahmins and the Kayasthas had effectively cornered all other avenues to social prominence.

It is not very useful to cite the circumstances of the early-mid 20th century. That period was not the period during which affirmative action was proposed and implemented, and why some of us (my families on both sides included - my maternal grandfather was housed and schooled by his brother-in-law, a minor government functionary, and 'paid' his way by scrubbing the household dishes. Those who are not Hindu will not understand the full implications of this).

The other side of the family was much worse off, as small-time school teachers, who bootstrapped themselves to professorship at a famous Dhaka college that was, thirty or forty years later, a particular object of attention during Operation Searchlight.

What we are discussing has nothing to do with those Horatio Alger stories. It has everything to do with inherited social prominence, never mind that this soured post-independence (the worst efforts of the Justice Party did not disenfranchise the Brahmins at that time; it took Annadurai and Karunanidhi to achieve that).

To remind you that this is to be mutually dismissed, not a penny of what my parents left us was inherited. Not even as much land as is covered by the point of a needle.

TO BE CONT.

@Nilgiri

Please let me finish my reply - the second and possibly further sections - before addressing my arguments. If you decide to address them.

The other disadvantages only even enter the picture (much less get tackled effectively) when you focus on economic upliftment first and foremost. Absolute poverty is terrible and affects a great wretched toll on the psychology of people....I can show you a multitude of studies regarding this....or why the "enlightenment" even happened in the west pragmatically only during the industrial revolution.

Yet we expect people in such squalor to engage effectively on the intermixing of history, philosophy and worth of education throughout the ages and express a nuanced and sustained political choice on it? This was exactly why education was deliberately shut up by both the British and their lackeys that took over in 47....and convenient bogeymen found for explaining away the condition caused by that and new ripe targets to deflect hostility to as well.

You can continue to do like crap but at least you now have the "freedom" to be angry at the historical "oppressors" (who we the neo-clique label) about it....keep voting for more of the same (rather than query what it is that causes poverty and ignorance and address that)! After all misdirected hostility and sowing of division based on it....has such a sparing use worldwide in politics historically.



Theres an oxymoron if I ever saw one. Govt regulation allowing greater access to something? The very word regulate has a meaning right? There should be govt deregulation on all of it (access wise). What the govt should focus on are upholding good rule of law and courts.....not regulating (i.e intervening to "share" limited supply that it creates).



Thats what laws and law enforcement is about. Put the investment and institution over there....not the dumb blame narrative based on winner takes all delusion.

But good rule of law has also been thrown to the wayside by the neo-casteist clique that took over after the British. From the get go the constitution was framed to be overly complicated and humongous for this very reason I suspect, instead of something simple and direct concerning what human rights are (especially inherent ones) and clearly defined role of the govt.



I'm not talking about the full "reversing" of it. I'm talking about giving a basic chance to reversing it....rather than get stuck in quagmire of creating a myriad of ever increasing identity politics through abhorrent things like Mandal Commission. That has always been the elimination of absolute poverty (the kind of poverty where you cant even think straight because you are literally wasting away). Yet there was some blind application of exactly what you describe "a finely honed system"....except its only benefactors are politicians who can pit groups against each other using any narrative of their fancy (because who actually researches and reads the history well and in a neutral way with ample debate?)



Limited govt...maximum (well defined) rule of law....at least the maximum striving for that. Instead the exact opposite was put into place.



Well every country is unique. I am not saying the US or any other country at some point "translates" over into anything resembling congruence....all I am saying is that big govt intervention (especially in parallel with its closely related cousins - extrajudicial strong arming + identity politicking propaganda) has a lingering and omnipresent theme in the whole world. It should be strictly avoided....there was plenty of hindsight already available regarding this in the 1947 - 1950 timeframe (heck WW2 and all the causes for it was just a few years before).

The wrong decisions were made, and now we have to fix it slowly and correct it. But it takes a sustained effort in first openly debating each and every narrative taken as "unquestionable" during the monolithic political period of 1950 - 1990.



Continued exacerbation of the identity politics over there? This is not a problem at its root unique to India (or any country). It is why I come to this with somewhat different perspective.



Well Gandhi made a bunch of mistakes...but I really don't blame him all that much (with regards to this) given he was pretty much fixed on the political independence of the country as his overarching goal.

I have a feeling he could have done everything absolutely correct...and we would have still a lot of the issues we are grappling with at the same severity (because its far more complicated as to why).

What was needed (in hindsight) was the first few political leaders of independent India to focus on education and rule of law as priorities for the social program side....both of these were squandered and instead muddied with a multitude of other things and the first overarching thing that surfaced was quite poisonous (the blame game narrative for easy politics) much like the churning of the ocean of milk in the mythology. Im holding out still for the long term product...we are finding our way....so we need not be dissuaded or dejected. Even the people that made mistakes that I blame whatever for...I am quite empathetic to overall....there is purpose and meaning to it all.



You made me chuckle...good job my friend.

It is more of a label I use for the larger clique/bureaucracy I have been going on about here...look its a phase we are mostly over now and have to learn from...but we need to discuss what the narratives sustained during that period (specifically for the politics) openly and deeply...so we can find something better and more rational to work with. Sharing what little you have (as substitute for growing it bigger) and divide and rule ...both brought on purpose by the powers that be (for maximum control through maximum dependency)....are in rear-view mirror increasingly. Its time to move on.

Every society in the world stratifies, it is human nature, its in our larger psyche. We are imperfect beings who in our ego build civilisations in first place. The basic issue will never go away (simply new labels and structures occupy the old ones over time). Unless you change us to not be human (which Das Kapital and other such big absolute govt works dream about)....but that is another debate altogether.

So with that in mind we should rather focus on the larger picture of propelling capital, education (Esp critical thinking) and our greater destiny....rather than bickering over who the bogeyman was....because it will always be those that are smallest in number and easiest to pick on....think about it. That is a very bad precedent to set for down the road when we are powerful enough (and can actually lay much larger hurt on both ourselves and others).

I am no false flag. I was banned on this forum but you were never.

Now who is who is very apparent. Isn't it?

You were denounced by @hellfire, and banned, and let back in for reasons not understood by mere mortals.

I, on the other hand, have met @hellfire, and several other members of PDF.

So put a sock in it.

You can either kill the poor or kill the rich.

Either way poverty would be removed.

But there are only 20% rich and 80% poor. So which one is more easy?

Suvarna Teja, still.