Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Indians are so civilised and Anglo-Saxons so aggressive

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why Indians are so civilised and Anglo-Saxons so aggressive

    Why Indians are so civilised and Anglo-Saxons so aggressive

    Why some nations are extremely aggressive with such strong desire to conquer and to enforce their “culture” or anti-culture on others? Where is this destructive will to power coming from?
    Why some other nations, like India , practically never in the history showed such aggressive behaviour.
    For example Characid and Buddha much more offended and threatened traditional Hindu tradition than Christ Romans and Jewish society. But Hindus never had in mind to falsely accuse and kill them, on the contrary they developed their own philosophies to intellectually and spiritually defend tradition of Veda and authority of Brahmins from Charvakas materialism and Buddhism.
    Or another example in history. First Russian state was established with help of Scandinavians with agreement of Russian people to have first Russian Car as a Viking. In doing so The Car with other Vikings did not take advantage to conquer Russia, on the contrary, they adopted the common religion and culture and coexisted in piece and respect without any intention to enslave Russian population as for example Anglo-Saxons did with many other nations.
    Why Scandinavian people managed to progress and mature as civilized and peaceful countries and societies and others did not?
    On the other hand why Anglo-Saxon nations, always have had totally different behaviour than Chinese and Scandinavians? Why today’s USA, instead of going around and spending money on killing people, does not save kids in Africa from dying of hunger and misery of poverty?
    Well, it is not easy but, at least, let us try to find rational explanations and answers on those questions.

    Brief history and character of Anglo-Saxon societies
    As genetically cold, rational people, suffering from lack of emotion and compassion, English people always have been perfect ground for developing cruel and inhumane society in different forms through history.
    As one isolated island without too much touch with the outside world, England culturally never was part of European continent.
    Suppressed and occupied by Romans people in their British islands (for centuries considered as a deep Roman province where someone usually could be sent by the punishment ) lived isolated from the outside world, without having a chance to develop civilized spiritual and cultural life like continental part of Europe.
    Charles Darwin could not accidentally appear in England where he established his theory of evolution which basic principle is that only the strongest and the most adaptable species can survive.
    Although Darwin specifically explained that his theory strictly works in the animal world, the English found that the theory very well suited to them and happily applied it first on themself and later, forcefully on others in form of so called “ Social Darwinism ” and primitive capitalism, with modified Darwin’s conclusion that “Only the strongest and the most adaptable species have right to survive”.
    This inhumane, uncivilized competitive environment adopted cruelty as a part of every day culture or anti-culture and life.
    Later England became a society with strictly distinctive classes where upper class despised lower class and people of lower class had very little chance to improve their status, which more or less remained until today.
    Early primitive capitalism brought even more cruelty when for example children as young as seven were forced to work in coal mines and were starved to death in doing so.
    In Victorian period virtually the whole nation was trained as an army in order to conquer and enslave other peoples in the world.
    At that period it was established practice of training children, at as early age as possible, to control and suppress their emotion in order to become tough and emotionally untouchable as a part of building superior race ( similar as it happened later on in Germany ).
    This practice remains to these days in the majority of Anglo-Saxon countries as common part of their “education”. The side effect of this training is that people at adult period of their life became creatures without emotion and compassion as individuals, which makes depression number one disease in Anglo-Saxon world.
    Consequently because of their rational, culturally and spiritually unimaginative nature Anglo-Saxon people always suffered from lack of moral and ethical values.
    So inhumane society in such circumstances produced enormous number of criminals, very frustrated and extremely aggressive people who could not see any other hope in their life except to commit crime, for many of them, simply to survive.
    To get rid of so large number of criminals England decided to a rational and radical step sending them as convicts to America, Australia, New Zealand and Canada.
    In order to keep their frustration under control English allowed their convicts carry out the largest genocide in the history of the world by killing about 40 million American Indians, uncounted number of Australian Aborigines and New Zealand Maoris.
    In order to satisfy their greed and ambitions and to keep their convict population under control English came up to an great idea of reinventing slavery, when rest of civilized world forgot it as a social concept long time ago. They enslaved millions people in Africa and brought them to America that thy can be raped, killed and abused as much as Anglo convicts wanted to do so. This, we would say in today’s term “mental treatment”, was successful for a while. But unfortunately in the meantime, the English lost their power and had to leave America because of convict uprising.
    Very shortly after this black slaves gained freedom.
    Later on large number of Jewish people colonized America converting Anglo-Saxons in Jewish religion, “Golden Calf” or as Jesus Christ called it “To serve Mammon”, that worships gold, materialistic values, profits and so on.
    This religion together with capitalism has brought a very powerful new Empire as a combination of aggressive Anglo-Saxon rationalism and Jewish pragmatism, that has been terrorizing the world till now.
    Genetically motivated convicts desire for enslaving and killing others, now, turned on people outside of USA.
    First target were neighbouring counters like Porte Rico, then Cuba, Mexico but shortly they expended their predatory ambitions attacking Korea, China then again Cuba, Vietnam, Iran, Iraq, Serbia, Somalia and again Iraq
    And finally, recently, Russian borders have been surrounded by NATO troops.
    Australia has practically remained until today as a British colony (Governor General as a Queen’s representative has power to sack Australian prime minister what happened in 70’s with at that time prime minister Goth Whitlam) where British managed to keep majority convict Anglo-Saxon population under control manly allowing them to abuse and kill native aboriginal population as much as they want. Similar happened in Canada and New Zealand.
    Also the fact that those countries have been less under pragmatic Jewish influence made them a bit less aggressive towards others than Americans has been.

    Conclusion:
    Main reason for arrogance
    The main reason for ongoing arrogant behaviour of Anglo-Saxon people can be found in their cultural isolation and lack of respect for the rest of the world. In such circumstances they did not have chance to compare themselves with civilized nations (and to learn from them), building unfounded impression about their superiority.

    Lack of culture and creativity
    Partly because of their cold rational materialistic nature they were unable to develop their spiritual life as a predisposition for unique culture and spirituality.
    As a result of this they have always been focused on training rather than on education.
    By doing this, creative ability to develop civilized society was reduced to minimum.
    Why for example English are culturally very conservative? The answer is very simple:
    Someone who does not have creative energy to produce something unique and new sticks to something that is already there.

    Aggressive nature and desire for conquering others (or extreme will to power )
    Acceptance of dogmatic humanism, social Darwinism with cruel competitive capitalistic environment in function of self-purpose strictly materialistic lives, without genuine sense of compassion of individuals and convict ancestral past produced frustrated spiritually and culturally poor, selfish, aggressive, self destructive and barbaric society like Roman Empire was.
    This societies wants to export its primitive and destructive values without respect for other human beings around the world.
    The most obvious example is exportation of false Christian teachings in form of materialistic and humanistic “Kingdom on Earth” principles ( From Catholicism , Protestantism to comical modern sects) to the rest of the world. As Robert Hughes put it: “They want to teach old civilizations about culture”.

    Luck of morality
    As the great Russian writer Dostoyevski said: “ If God is dead everything is permitted”.

    After demonizing and spreading lies against Iraq as a pretext for bombing Baghdad, a New York Times reporter was asked “ Do you think that is moral to misled the people and not tell the truth” replied:
    “I am not paid to be moral, I am paid to do my job”.

    Yes just to do the job, but what are the purpose and consequences, for all of us, in doing this job??
    Probably to go back to the caves.

  • #2
    i noly know in western film, india people was described as foolish servent of Anglo-Saxons .

    do you think it is a reflection of indian civilization?

    Comment


    • #3
      No way that is just a projection which the western people like to show.There is no way that the Indian civilization is that way.Indian civilization is the most advance and non volient civilization of the world.
      IndiaBook Sr Editor and Reviewer
      IndiaBook is like my child whom I want to nuture till perfection.It is a dream of success which will be made reality soon.

      Comment


      • #4
        But isn't the opening post reverse Darwinism? Attributing convoluted flaws to the genetic appearance of another human being?

        Comment


        • #5
          Let me begin by saying that as someone who's studied colonialism, and who's well aware of neoliberal globalization, I'm one of the last people to "defend the West" but what I see here is that your post essentially is using the same racist logic that the British used to demonize and reduce Indians during the Raj. Frankly, you're as guilty of ignorance as the Brits were.

          "On the other hand why Anglo-Saxon nations, always have had totally different behaviour than Chinese and Scandinavians?"

          - I question how non-aggressive China is considering its actions in Tibet, in '89 in Tianamen square, and in dealing with political dissent inside China.

          "As genetically cold, rational people, suffering from lack of emotion and compassion, English people always have been perfect ground for developing cruel and inhumane society in different forms through history."

          - Congradulations on adopting the European practice of racism as your own. Attributing cultural phenomenon to genetics was a practice first developed by the first anthropologists during the early colonial era in Africa. Frankly, if you think British Imperialism is genetic in nature, you need to do some more reading. It's a lot more complicated than that.

          Besides, what does that say if it is genetics? You essentially excuse the British of any personal wrong doing because "they're programmed to act like that" it ceases to be a matter of ethical decisions.

          "lived isolated from the outside world, without having a chance to develop civilized spiritual and cultural life like continental part of Europe."

          - Such as? . . . Is Germany for example any more/less spiritual or cultural than England?

          "Although Darwin specifically explained that his theory strictly works in the animal world, the English found that the theory very well suited to them and happily applied it first on themself and later, forcefully on others in form of so called “ Social Darwinism ” and primitive capitalism, with modified Darwin’s conclusion that “Only the strongest and the most adaptable species have right to survive”."

          - You're forgetting that the German Nazis used this theory, as did the Americans, French, and others. It's not a strictly British phenomenon.

          "This practice remains to these days in the majority of Anglo-Saxon countries as common part of their “education”. The side effect of this training is that people at adult period of their life became creatures without emotion and compassion as individuals, which makes depression number one disease in Anglo-Saxon world."

          - Do you have any examples of this type of "training" occuring anywhere today?

          "Consequently because of their rational, culturally and spiritually unimaginative nature Anglo-Saxon people always suffered from lack of moral and ethical values."

          - Again, if you substituted "anglo-saxon" for "Indian" this could be from an article written by a colonist during the Raj. Same logic, different perspective. The only difference is that an Indian is the author.

          "Later on large number of Jewish people colonized America converting Anglo-Saxons in Jewish religion, “Golden Calf” or as Jesus Christ called it “To serve Mammon”, that worships gold, materialistic values, profits and so on.
          This religion together with capitalism has brought a very powerful new Empire as a combination of aggressive Anglo-Saxon rationalism and Jewish pragmatism, that has been terrorizing the world till now."

          - How on earth have Jews "colonized" America, any more so than any other group? You claim that Jews have converted Christians, however Judaism is one of the least likely religions to do conversions because of it's exclusive nature.

          "The main reason for ongoing arrogant behaviour of Anglo-Saxon people can be found in their cultural isolation and lack of respect for the rest of the world. In such circumstances they did not have chance to compare themselves with civilized nations (and to learn from them), building unfounded impression about their superiority."

          - The main problem here is you are treating Anglo-Saxons as a monolith, much in the same way the Western media treats India or Islam. You make no allowances for difference within "anglo-saxon society" meaning, in your eyes, a person from a small town in Alabama is in the same boat from someone who grew up living among Indians in Toronto.

          I suppose, if it is all about genetics, than I must be a mutant, and so must most people living in this city.

          "As a result of this they have always been focused on training rather than on education."

          - Explain please.

          "Why for example English are culturally very conservative? The answer is very simple:
          Someone who does not have creative energy to produce something unique and new sticks to something that is already there."

          - If this is the case, why is there a thriving contemporary art community in England?

          Again, there's no need for me to comment on all of the failures and the wrongs of British or, Anglo-Saxon society, we all know them and have experienced a lot of them. But I just find it extremely problematic for someone who has been the victim of British racism to be using the same type of destructive reasoning in their own work.

          Sort of like Holocaust survivors oppressing Palestinians, or African Americans dressing up in charicterateurs of native Americans.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by nameeta
            No way that is just a projection which the western people like to show.There is no way that the Indian civilization is that way.Indian civilization is the most advance and non volient civilization of the world.
            - I think that's a rather non-critical reading of Indian history and contemporary politics.

            Post-independence there are too many instances of communalism to paint such a utopian vision of India.

            Comment


            • #7
              I think us Indians fight among ourselves too much.

              Comment


              • #8
                that is true. no one gives a damn to the unity of the country. they are to themselves and aloof as much as possible. after something is gone wrong, the first thing to come into their minds is that the government is at fault.
                miqsh
                EVERY CLOUD HAS A SILVER LINING

                Comment


                • #9
                  Well Indians are never shown as servants of Anglo saxons in western movies. We never show our aggressiveness but we have enough strenght to occupy whole of Asia. They face our wrath when they attack us. But during other times instead of wasting our energy on conquering we use it for the development of humans like we did the first surgery in the world and stuffs.

                  Or else we spend our time fighting among ourselfes and killing us.

                  We always did and we are still doing.

                  We are dumb that way. Only when you come outta your country you understand the importance of unity.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by thamonindew
                    - I question how non-aggressive China is considering its actions in Tibet, in '89 in Tianamen square, and in dealing with political dissent inside China.
                    your question is so pale.
                    The tibeten skirmish in 50's belongs our chinese civil political problem with no points for you to quote as the evidence.

                    China always behave non-aggressively esp. towards our international problems.Remenber experiences in 60's and you will learn it.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by china-patriot
                      your question is so pale.
                      The tibeten skirmish in 50's belongs our chinese civil political problem with no points for you to quote as the evidence.

                      China always behave non-aggressively esp. towards our international problems.Remenber experiences in 60's and you will learn it.
                      Non-agressive are you sure.Didn't you'll attack India in 1962 over the border issue.You'll attacked us after calling us brothers .

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        these people who are Chinese or something whatever they are they are cowards (no offence to other chinese). These people can't attack us front to front. Had we used our air force Chinese forces would've been humiliated. Man if you guys attack us now you guys are not gonna get of easy. Well whatever happened happened. We don't care about those cowards now. Each Indian army died after killing atleast 10 Chinese.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          i noly know in western film, india people was described as foolish servent of Anglo-Saxons .

                          do you think it is a reflection of indian civilization?

                          Learn some manners you Chinese lot. You Chinese are very rude people.

                          As for Anglo-Saxons there wasn't even any Anglo-Saxon race around when Indian civilization had well planned cities 5000 years ago. Europeans back in those times lived in stone caves.
                          Last edited by EyeOnTheWall; 07-17-2006, 09:27 AM.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X