Showing posts with label political agenda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label political agenda. Show all posts

Friday, March 31, 2023

USA creating a fuzzy narrative that borders on falsehood against India.

 Recently, I came across a video by one Jacob Templin, who supposedly is an adjunct professor at Columbia University and Head of Video at Thomson Reuters from New York. His video was titled, “We don’t know how many people live in India, and it’s a problem”.

 The question to ask is, why is a leftist liberal like Jacob Templin interested in social issues of a foreign country? He neither stays in India, nor pays taxes here; and any views or opinions that he might have in this context are immaterial and unwarranted. Yet, these leftists keep on harping on issues in foreign countries, since its their very nature to try and pull-down others to their gutter levels.

 The USA as a nation is not known for its social integration. It’s a nation that has a history of slavery of colored people by white people, and a bloodier history of acquiring land through the mass massacre of native Indian tribes, and through war with neighboring governments to annex their territory. From the north-east where the first English people landed, to the Western shores of USA, their primary strategy of land-grab was through violence, blood-shed and genocide. Make no mistake about it, USA has committed genocide across continents and over decades to assert their ‘superiority’ over others.

 But, coming to the specific video that is the center of this article, its rather comical that the “victim” that is portrayed in the video is overweight to the point of being obese and even her family members who are seen in the background are, to put it mildly, overweight. The two Indian lady narrators in the video are, as usual, representing the bleeding-hearts that you stumble across in various social gatherings in India, and who justify their existence in society by living off the scraps thrown at them by the illiterate liberals of the western world.

 Indians have food security. The ‘victim’ in the video complains that she is buying flour from the stores in India at the price of ₹ 35/- per kilo (approximately 0.43 US cents for 2.2 US Lbs). Compare this to the March 2023 wheat flour retail price in USA at 0.52 cents per pound, or approximately 20% more expensive in USA as compared to India.

 Templin also seems to be totally unconcerned and oblivious to the fact that 9 million children in USA face hunger daily and do not know where they will find their next meal. This is according to the NGO in USA called Feeding America. Templin should also take note of the fact that off the 1-in-8 kids that are at risk of hunger in his country; black and Latino kids are more likely to face hunger than white children due to the systematic racial injustice in his country, USA.

In comparison, during the Covid lock-down in India, the government of India, under the leadership of Prime Minister Modi, distributed food at subsidized rates to over 80 million residents of India; without any discrimination, giving 35 kg of food grain every month to families at the cost of 1 Indian rupees ($0.0121) to 3 Indian rupees ($0.0362). This free food program was terminated after the Covid pandemic’s dangers receded. As of today (in 2023), the Food Corporation of India through foresight and planning of an efficient supply chain management, growth in food production, and customer affordability due to subsidized prices for consumers, price support for farmers and food availability through extra grain distribution; have substantially reduced the number of food–insecure people in India. Due to this forward planning by our Prime Minister Modi’s government, the number of food-insecure people in India is projected to decrease to 24.7 million or 1.7 percent, by the next decade.

In the video, there is talk about growing unemployment and inflation in my India. The blatant lies here are not only mischievous but dangerously anti-Indian.

According to the recent (March 2023) report by CMIE (Centro for Monitoring Indian Economy), India’s unemployment rate in India is around 7.45% at present. Compare this to the unemployment rate in USA which stands at an average of 4.7% nationally, which is on the higher side for a ‘developed industrial’ nation.

The current inflation rate in India is 6.16% on average, which is calculated based on CPI (Consumer Price Index) values for the last 12 months ending in January 2023 while that of USA is 6.04% on average (down from 9.06% in June 2022). [Reference Inflationdata (dot) com].

The one issue that Templin and his ilk will never have an opinion on is the gun-violence in USA. According to ABC (American Broadcasting Company) News, more than 9,800 people were killed by gun violence in USA in the first 90 days of this year. That is 108 people killed per day. So, Templin is worried about the people problems in India, but has no published opinion about the people problem in his own country? 

Essentially, a country of 1.3 billion people with a rising economy cannot be the problem of Americans in any manner. But the liberal leftists like Templin consider every democracy, including their own as a danger to society, and therein lies the root cause of all intellectual insurgency.

Let Jacob Templin and others like him know, that our India is on a path to success under the able leadership of our Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and leftist liberals like him are not going to stop our success.

 


 

 

Wednesday, March 15, 2023

Rationale and Logic in Politics - what's the difference?

In politics, the terms "rationale" and "logic" are often used interchangeably, but they have distinct meanings. Rationale refers to the underlying reasons or justifications for a particular action or policy, while logic refers to the systematic and rational way of reasoning used to arrive at a conclusion or decision. In this article, we will explore the differences between these two concepts and provide two examples to illustrate their use in politics.

In politics, rationale often involves an assessment of the benefits and costs associated with a particular policy. This assessment can be based on a range of factors, including economic, social, political, and ethical considerations.

For example, the rationale for implementing a carbon tax may be based on the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate the impact of climate change. Proponents of the carbon tax may argue that it will provide an incentive for individuals and businesses to reduce their carbon footprint, leading to a decrease in emissions and an improvement in environmental outcomes. The costs associated with the tax, such as higher prices for energy and goods, may be seen as a necessary sacrifice to achieve this goal.

Another example of rationale in politics is the justification for military intervention. The rationale for military intervention may be based on the need to protect national security or to promote democracy and human rights. Supporters of military intervention may argue that it is necessary to prevent a humanitarian crisis or to stop the spread of terrorism. The costs associated with military intervention, such as the loss of life and the financial burden, may be seen as a necessary sacrifice to achieve these goals.

Logic in politics refers to the systematic and rational way of reasoning used to arrive at a conclusion or decision. In politics, logic often involves a careful analysis of the evidence and a consideration of the possible outcomes of different policies.

For example, the logic of trade policy may involve an assessment of the benefits and costs of free trade versus protectionism. Proponents of free trade may argue that it promotes economic growth and leads to lower prices for consumers, while opponents of free trade may argue that it leads to job losses and inequality. The logic of trade policy involves weighing these different factors and determining the best course of action based on the available evidence.

Another example of logic in politics is the use of cost-benefit analysis. Cost-benefit analysis involves weighing the costs and benefits of a particular policy or decision to determine its overall value. For example, cost-benefit analysis may be used to assess the economic impact of a new infrastructure project or to determine the most effective way to allocate government resources. The logic of cost-benefit analysis involves a systematic and rational approach to decision-making that is based on empirical evidence and quantitative analysis.

Overall, the difference between rationale and logic in politics lies in their focus. Rationale refers to the underlying reasons or justifications for a particular policy or action, while logic refers to the systematic and rational way of reasoning used to arrive at a conclusion or decision. Both concepts are important in politics, as they help policymakers and citizens to make informed decisions based on evidence and analysis.

Understanding the differences between these concepts can help to clarify political debates and facilitate more effective decision-making.

 


 

Sunday, January 29, 2023

The hidden enemies of India – the foreign media.

Facing enemies across our nation’s borders is an everyday affair for the Indian governments, over the last 75 years. These enemies are conspicuous and have an overt intension of fighting our country for their beliefs. But now we face a new enemy in the form of foreign media outlets who spread malicious lies, misinformation and fake new.

The leading news agency in this war against India is the Thomson Reuters corporation based in Toronto, Canada. Reuters has an interesting past. It was founded by German born Paul Reuter who worked at a book-publishing firm in Berlin and was involved in distributing radical pamphlets at the beginning of the ‘Revolutions of 1848’ which were a series of political upheavals throughout Europe that started that year. It remains the most widespread revolutionary wave in European history to date.

In its current form, where Reuters is a part of the Thomson media group, its anti-establishment behavior has not changed. This media company refuses to call terrorists as ‘terrorists’, as part of its “value – neutral values”, which basically means that it has no values to adhere to.

New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman rebuked Thomson Reuters for selling access to key economic survey data two seconds early to high-frequency algorithmic traders. The story strongly suggested that some Thomson Reuters customers were using their two-second head start (an eternity in the modern world of computerized trading) to front-run the markets.

From being accused for working with Western Intelligence agencies to promote their governments agendas across the world, to being sued for breach of contract by its employees, this company has been in a number of controversies. The Thomson family itself is full of controversies, hidden away behind a wall of legality. Theirs is a world where trust is illusive, motives are suspect and opportunists abound. Relationships are mediated by lawyers, litigation chisels away at personal relationships, private lives are defined as "exclusive property" in confidentiality agreements.

In the spring of 2003, a grand jury in USA called in a probe of a private detective named Anthony Pellicano who allegedly was involved in spying activities on behalf of a Thomson family member. It was not the first time the Los Angeles private detective's name had surfaced in relation to Thomson's legal disputes. Pellicano first provided aid to Taylor Thomson (heir to the Thomson Corporation’s fortune) in early 2002, and the indictment suggests he continued working on her case over the ensuing months. In late 2002, FBI agents raided the offices of Pellicano and uncovered a cache of illegal explosives. Pellicano later pleaded guilty to these charges and was sentenced to 30 months in jail. But what investigators also unearthed in the detective's offices were transcripts of recorded conversations, tapes and computer files, which led to an intense investigation. Pellicano now faces charges connected to a vast espionage operation, whose targets may have included Thomson's legal adversaries.

This private detective and some of his clients are said to have used illegally gathered information to secure "a tactical advantage in litigation by learning their opponents' plans, strategies, perceived strengths and weaknesses, settlement positions, and other confidential information."

In 2020, Reuters announced that it was mobilizing and expanding its fact-checking unit to fight misinformation on social media, but was itself spreading misinformation on a regular basis. In August 2022, Reuters had been accused by the Government of Turkey for targeting that country by publishing misleading and fake news.

On June 9, 2020, three Reuters journalists Jack Stubbs, Raphael Satter, and Christopher Bing personally visited India, and incorrectly used the image of an Indian herbal medicine entrepreneur in an exclusive story titled: "Obscure Indian cyber firm spied on politicians, investors worldwide". Raphael Satter initially claimed that they had mistaken the man for the suspected hacker Sumit Gupta because both men share the same business address. A check by local media however showed that both men were in different buildings and not as claimed by Raphael Satter. The prominent investigative journalist later acknowledged that the false story was published without proper investigation with the purpose to spice up the tale.

Thomson Reuters as an organization never accepts its role in the spread of fake and misleading news. In 2018, it ran a “poll” that ranked India as the most dangerous in the world for women. When challenged by Indian journalists; Belinda Goldsmith, editor-in-chief of the Thomson Reuters foundation stated that the report was “not based on Data but on perception, and that it was researched with a sample of 548 responses in a country of 1.3 billion people.  Goldsmith never acknowledged this story as fake, nor did Reuters apologize for publishing an untrue and misleading story.

In October 2022, in a propaganda piece published in 'Context' (a media platform run by Thomas Reuters Foundation), its journalist Rina Chandran alleged that disinformation, which supposedly originated in India, was the cause of Hindu-Muslim unrest in Leicester city in England’s East Midlands region. Rina Chandran has a history of peddling fake news. For years now, Chandran has been using social media platforms to vilify India and make false allegations. In April this year, Chandran resorted to scaremongering and spreading fake news alleging that Hindu goons in India were destroying Muslim livelihoods, but without providing any evidence to prove her claims.

When caught, the usual defense of Thomson Reuters is that they are a “wire service” that compiles reports from across the globe and forwards these reports to its consumers in an “unbiased” manner, thereby putting the onus of responsibility onto the reporters. In reality however, Thomson Reuters promotes news from leftist–liberal reporters, in a manner that barely keeps it from stepping into the domain of fake news, but firmly within the domain of misrepresented news; which they later either withdraw or issue corrections upon; after the required damage has been done.

Reuters mostly targets countries in Asia as part of the North American – British – European propaganda. It pretends to be an upstanding organization that promotes high ethical standards against corruption and calls itself a defender of human rights; while ignoring the fact that politicians in Europe have caught indulging in massive corruption, and those in North America are frequently abusing the rights of their own citizens.

In conclusion, any news from Thomson Reuters has to be considered as fake and anti–India propaganda, without any reservations whatsoever.

 


 

<script async src="https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js?client=ca-pub-1827088090084063"
     crossorigin="anonymous"></script>

Monday, January 16, 2023

Calm, Composed and Deadly - the New War of India!



 ‘An arrow shot by an archer may or may not kill a single person; but skillful intrigue, devised by a wise man, may kill even those who are in the womb.’ [Acharya Chanakya]

Physical wars have been an inevitable part of humanity throughout ages, from the Mahabharata war to the current conflicts across the world. The need for ‘power’ and to ‘conquer’ others through aggression, violence and bloodshed has not changed since ancient times and this has always inevitably resulted in loss of lives and assets, and compromises of values, principles and ethics.

In this modern age of technological disruptions and scientific innovations, physical (open) war has mostly been replaced by covert war carried out silently. Every type of war requires that the state must be fortified, the armed forces always prepared for war, and large sections of the population trained to defend the country and themselves during the course of war. Chanakya’s Arthashastra suggests that in order to achieve peace, policy has to be shaped prudently and through diplomacy. However, he also specifies that to excel in any war; it is appropriate to use assassination, discord, spying and false propaganda to achieve victory.

“I know that today’s era is not the era for war,” Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi told Russian President Vladimir Putin at a meeting in Samarkand, Uzbekistan, in September 2022. This is more than an advice from the former to the latter. It’s an insight into India’s strategy to conduct war through diplomacy by building friendly relationships with countries. Effectively, India’s political leadership is following the advice of Sun Tzu, the Chinese philosopher, military strategist and General in ancient China; “to fight wars without going into battle and to subdue the enemy without fighting.”

This is a necessity for India at the present moment. Our military hardware is inadequate for battle across two fronts. The government’s publicly available reports suggest that by 2030 the IAF may have only 30 fighter squadrons while the projected requirement is for 45 squadrons. Half of the current aircraft are expected to reach the end of their combat capability life between now and then, while the Government’s policy to boost domestic manufacturing of defense systems is currently sluggish at best. About 80% of Indian Army’s equipment and 60% of IAF equipment is of Russian origin. The Navy’s share of Russian equipment is 40% but it is dependent on European suppliers for many of the critical equipment used on ships. The Indian policy makers have to make a harder push towards indigenization of critical weapons systems to replaced the ageing ones. Fighter jets and their component systems, helicopters, battle tanks, the Navy’s submarines; should not dependent of foreign suppliers for technologies and spare parts. Our defense preparedness will remain lacking in required efficiency until 100% indigenization is achieved. This will require the mindset change from blind modernization, to achieving effective performance of available weapons systems.

Significant flaws have to be addressed in the areas of qualitative requirements and equipment procurement. Policy confusions from the past has forced and at times is still forcing our military to perform without full preparations, and the uncoordinated efforts of military modernization, sluggish indigenized technological advances and improvised tactics cannot make up for the structural deficiencies in our defense preparedness. The recent thrust on indigenous technology for military modernization will need almost a decade to show an optimal deterrent effect at the battle-field level, leaving the Indian military to defend our nation’s sovereignty with whatever resources that are available, inadequate as they might be. Defense modernization has to be combined with upgraded logistics and a military-industrial infrastructure that will increase our defense preparedness to the levels required for our optimal security needs. Till then, India is necessarily dependent on its international diplomacy skills to keep our adversaries; China and its puppet state Pakistan in a state of constant insecurity.

This will require a policy that will stop overt and covert attacks against India, its citizens, its interests, its friends and allies around the world, as well as to create an international environment inhospitable to our adversaries and their supporters. The strategy must emphasize that all instruments of national power; diplomatic, economic, law enforcement, financial, information dissemination, intelligence, and military; are to be called upon in combating international and domestic dangers. The policy should fit into the wider strategic concept of “defense-in-depth,” and should complement other elements including sub-strategies against weapons of mass destruction, cyber-attack, infrastructure protection, and narcotics control. It must focus on identifying and eliminating threats before they reach the borders of India. A strong preemptive component must be included in this policy, along-with a strong focus on reducing proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and a defense-in-depth framework to secure our Nation.

India’s security policy must contain concentric perimeters of security or ‘security rings.’ The outermost will consist of intelligence organizations and diplomats operating overseas. Their primary objective should be to gather information that will preempt attacks on Indian soil. The next inner perimeter should be a mix of Customs, Immigration, Coast Guard and Border guards whose focus will be on the borders of India and the goods and persons crossing through. The next inner perimeter should be central and state police, Home Guard, and allied services that function within the borders of our Nation and are responsible for protecting our towns and cities. The innermost ring should be a public- private partnership between the private sector and government departments to play a joint role in the protection of critical infrastructures such as transport (land-sea-air), financial, communications (mobile, broadband, TV, radio) and power (electricity generation).

Diminish, Deny, Defend and Defeat should be the core principle.

Sun Tzu said, “If you know the enemy and know yourself, your victory will not stand in doubt.”  

China and its loyal media channels have been advertising Chinese triumphs ranging from the launch of its first super aircraft-carrier to winning in Asia, diplomatically and economically. After it infected the world with the Covid-19 virus, most countries consider China as a major threat, with increasingly negative views about its politics and aspirations. While China and its autocratic rulers focus on a top-down planning and centralized policy making approaches for their policies; we should utilize our democratic values and our assets of diversity, agility, adaptability and ambiguity towards greater advantage in our fight against foreign influences. We must convert our goals into requirements, clearly define and communicate the outcomes, give incentives to achieve these defined outcomes, and allow private industry the freedom to innovate. China has been waging global economic warfare since 1998, and to counter this aspect we have to ensure that our economic objectives are integrated into our acquisition strategy and functionality. To quote Sun Tzu, “water naturally runs from high places and hastens downwards. Thus, in war, the way to victory is to avoid what is strong and strike at what is weak.”

In our complex bureaucratic processes, we are often focused on issues that we cannot change. Instead we should, like water, follow the path of least resistance, achieving a continuous pursuit of progress, while striving for victory. 

‘If the end could be achieved by non-military methods, even by methods of intrigue, duplicity and fraud, I would not advocate an armed conflict’. [Acharya Chanakya].

 



The changing landscape of terrorism and its funding.

  In the last two years (2023 / 2024) deaths from terrorism have increased by over 22% and are now at their highest levels since 2017, thoug...