Wednesday, July 05, 2006

why are most marxist converts in india upper-caste?

july 5th, 2006

isn't this strange? there was a report some time ago that the newsrooms in the english language media were dominated by upper-caste hindus. most of them of course are stealth converts to marxism, as indicated by what passes for 'journalism' in india.

btw, there should be a law that those who convert to marxism must take on indicative names such as stalin or mao or pol pot so that the rest of us can be wary of their murderous intent. the first person who should take advantage of this is duryodhan, er... arjun singh. i think the name pol pot singh has a certain sangfroid about it, don't you? that can be followed by romilla thapar taking on the appellation jiang qing thapar (said qing having been mao's widow and a prominent member of the gang of four, btw).

and this brings up the question: since all these upper-caste people have come through the indian education system, wouldn't it make sense to reduce the number of upper-caste people who get education? in that case, there will be fewer commies around :-)

as i have pointed out before, the commies are the most casteist (and anti-feminist) people in india, barring only the christists and the 'dravidianists'.

7 comments:

nizhal yoddha said...

good question. i deliberated on that for a minute, sriram. the reason i went this way is the guy's name is arjun, not arjuna singh, so if he had been named by his parents duryodhana, it'd actually end up being written in hindi as duryodhan. he's a hindi, not a sanskrit speaker. just like karan singh, not karna singh.

iamfordemocracy said...

A few years ago, a survey was conducted amongst the IAS trainees at Dehradun. The findings were revealing. Post-1990, (after OBC reservations step-up) there was a marked change in the outlook of trainees. Before, they were liberal. After, more % was "conservative". I do not remember the issues addressed however I do remember that AFTER, a big chunk held radical views against muslims!!

I firmly believe that Indians made a mistake by idolising Nehru and Bajpayee - both Brahmins. The most ideal combination for national interests might be one where Brahmins are only advisors, not rulers. Brahmins, I feel (I might be wrong), are too liberal and soft, and they care too much about the propriety of methods used.

R.A.Krishna said...

Marxists are part of the 4M axis and the fifth M is Maino. All these people are out to decimate India. Sonia is the great white of Jaws and will tear this country apart. Caste is irrelevant as far as Marxists are concerned. They are Rakshasas born to Brahmins. Of course even Rakshasas had their virtues but you would be hard pressed to find any in these people. Praful Bidwai wrote an article recently in rediff.com praising V P Singh! Typical anti national. Pity that people in India are like dinosaurs who realise that their tail is being eaten only after they are tailless! Here the whole body is being eaten!

daisies said...

hi chandramahal,
it is my understanding that he was a kashmiri brahmin.
indira was married to a parsi, feroze gandhi. parsis are very different from muslims.
but i have also heard "nehru" comes from a root word that means boatman, and that could not have been brahmin. can someone shed more light on this ? thx.

_

habc said...

daisies - I do not know how far this site is true -but here is the link

http://www.nehrufamily.com/

habc said...

Notice that Kaaloo Kaaliaa and Ravanan (look look I caled you names - teacher teacher, he no he no, he called me names) will not show their faces on this thread.

daisies said...

Ananda Rajadhyaksh :),

The 'a' ending comes where it fits.

Notice how Hanuman is easier to say than Hanumana, because of the sequence of vowels.

On the other hand "Rajadhyaksha" is easier to say than "Rajadhyaksh".

Would have liked to write more but kinda short of time. So I guess I'll write another time.

Thanks
_