cross Fri Oct 27 18:11:16 2006 Dan Cross,,, cross Fri Oct 27 18:11:16 2006 cross Fri Oct 27 18:11:51 responses total.
This response has been erased.
This response has been erased.
This response has been erased.
India biggest political failing is in not keeping the Sikhs in country. Seems like every Indian trucker crossing the border is a Sikh from Punjab. And that is not an exageration. They tell me they are discriminated against in india and have left for that reason.
Wow, that is just so ... wrong. You really have no clue about the political scene in India do you? I mean, you've based the biggest failure of a country that is on the other side of the earth, not on what you've read, or what you've experienced, but on what you see coming through customs from a country that has a lot of sikh immigrants. "...like every Indian trucker crossing the border is a Sikh from Punjab." - Uhm yeah. Sikhs are known to be truck drivers (and farmers). It's just one of those traditions I guess. It's no surprise most Indian truck drivers will be sikh. ".. They tell me they are discriminated against in india and have left for that" Aside from the refusal to allow them to have their own country, that statement is highly exaggerated. I'm guessing most of them left when we had the riots back in 1984 (don't remember the details. I was 9) you have sikh immigrants for much the same reason you have immigrants of other religions or backgroudns - better life, more money, whatever else. And it's not like all the Sikhs have left the country. If you're going to base a country's political failing on immigration of it's people, don't limit it to just hte Sikhs. You have a lot of South Indians immigrating too. Include them into the theory too. I think of all the failings that the country has, Sikh immigration is pretty low on the list.
This response has been erased.
Folk from backwoods wisconsin feel the same way.
It would be like the first europeans who landed in America were discriminated in their own country ..Christopher Columbus ( or whoever it was ) et al . Many Indians leave india for better opportunities sake ..not for discrimination.
well, why do they all say they are discriminated against? And is this a caste thing where the india culture only allows them to be truchk drivers?
Yes, it was Christopher Columbus who discovered America. (THough some suspect it may have been discovered beforehand bgy Amerigo Vespucci, for whom the Ameica were named, and was almost certainly inhabited at some point in the late first or early second millenium AD by Vikings.) But afaik, the only discrimination Columbus faced was not getting funding for his trip "around the world" (most Europeans at the time thought the world was flat) from the authorities in his native Genoa, and having to go to the King and Queen iof Spain instead. Columbus, afaik, never actually *settled* in America - the English and Scottish (and Irish?) settlers who were the first to live their were Puritans and other religious denominations discriminated against by the Kings of England. So they were told, "If you go away to America and leave us alone you can govern yourselves and live."
It's not a caste thing that they're truck drivers, they just are. More like family run businesses, or something. I'm not sure why, but I'm pretty sure it has nothing to with caste How many Sikhs did you ask by the way? And when did they move to Canada? And why do you base the political failings of a country that's half way around the world on what some truck drivers tell you :P (The sikhs were pretty resourceful when it comes to looking for new oppurtunities. A lot of them move to Canada and open gass stations. Mostly because they know the trade. Same with the truck drivers. They're looking for a better life. )
Re #6: LOL.
(I thought Vespucci visited the New World after Columbus but was the first to recognise it as a new continent. Also, Spanish and Portuguese were settling in Florida and points south and west long before the Puritans left England.)
Not exactly a caste thing. But some professions arte like.. whatever the father does the son does too. You would be surprised toknow how many nepalis are in the army or even more so as security guards. NOthey were not discriminated into being security guards. That does not mean there is no discrimination in India , there is ..but not in THIS case that bru mentioned. Yeah there are discrimination against the girls ..but I am sure the situation has improved a lot in the last few years. Sapna being a girl might know better though.
Discrimination against females has decreased, but I think for all the wrong reaqsons. Sure, more women are working these days, but that's more because of a financial crunch than spreading the equality. It's near impossible to get by on one salary, so the wives need to work too. Of course when they get home they're supposed to keep house and cook, clean etc. This isn't true of all families, but of a vast majority you'll find women working in IT companies, but very few of them actually make it to higher posts. This is sadly evidenced in the company I work for. If a woman is head of a department you can bet its admin or something like that or a department that's mostly inconsequential. I see very few women tht are higher up in the company and the few that are there seem to head departments that are not thought that important. I've seen women who have great talent not utilised to their potential, but the men are given better oppurtunities. The discrimination is subtle, men seem to forge their bonds over cigaretty breaks where women aren't present (very few women smoke in India.You will find many men smoking, but when it comes to women, they're mostly the young "hip" crowd that seems to think it's cool. And even there, smoking is slowly becoming taboo, but this time for the right reasons) I live in bombay, and though it is one of the better cities for women in terms of the freedom and what they're socially allowed to do, you still have the eve-teasers and the starers in certain parts of the city. India has progressed when it comes to edquality among the sexes, but she still has to come a long way.
The changes would be gradual ..like it or not age old traditions ( howsoever bad ) won't go away in one day. I don't know much about women being discriminated in jobs .. but one factor also plays a part is that ..when a woman marries more likely than not she would quit her original company and get a job in a different city etc where her husband works. Many quit after having a child , so quite a few woman don't get promoted due to such. This was also pointed by some airforce guy in a magazine , women are expensive
damn lost conmection i guess anyway it was pointed out that women were quite a financial liablity in the Indian Air Force .. they trained a few and one gets pregnant and take s afew mnth's leave .. and all the money spent on their training gets wasted.
discriminating against women because they can get pregnant is the highest form of discrimination that women face. Other countries have women in their air-forces. I don't think that it would sit very well if that reason were given to not allow them to join the air-force. Men get married and move to other cities too. However, it never occurs to companies not to promote them on those grounds. Whetrher a person chooses to work after marriage or a child is an individual decision, and should not be generallised to all of womankind. One case comes to mind in my compan. My manager told me how all her peers were given on-site asignments, but she wasn't because she was a married woman. I think the decision should have been upto her if she thought she wanted to go or not, not the company's. (All I'm saying is she should have at least been asked what her priorities were instead of people assuming she wouldn't want to go). It's evident that her career never quite took off because she was a married woman. Using marriage and pregnancy as a basis to discriminate is still just that - discrimination against women.
ah you got me wrong .. Those are not basis for discrimination but some of the factors which works against women yes men do move to other cities .. but you have to agree that when men do move it is mostly for a better job , better pay etc .. women unfortunately do not have such freedom .. as I said most of the times its the woman who moves to the place where her husband is working and not vice versa. Unfortunate but true. And when they do move its not generally to a better job , better position , better position. Unfair yes ,..but that's the way it is. Other countries have women in the airforces too .. but Indian air force is not that rich to have pilots on leave for vacation on extended periods.
Whatever the reason people move to other cities, you don't discriminate on that basis. What's happenning is that companies are assuming that women will get married and move or have children and quit. That's not theirs to ssume. A lot of women get married to men in the same city. Why should they lose out just because the company fears that some women will move once married. It may be an economic factor with the Indian Air-Force, but the statement that women get pregnant being used as an excuse to not have women on the air-force just gets my goat.
I never said discrimination was right , I just pointed out the factors. It's not the companies job to assume ..but they to do their own risk analysis I guess. Take the case of a man and his wife who is 7 months pregnant. The man can go fly and fight , the woman cannot.
What's the risk analysis in asking a woman if she's open to taking an overseas assignment instead of just overlooking her.
Okay I wasn't talking about the overseas job thing. BUt the other factors I have mentioned. A woman is more likely to quit cos of marriage / pregnancy than men . Once unfair situation of the woman being made to change jobs cos of marriage and not vice -versa I am sure things would change for the better . The root of the problem needs to be solved first. A company wouldn't give a shit to who is promoted a man or a womanas long as they earn revenues for the company.
Drift: Chrissie Columbus did *not* discover *America*, regardless of the misinformation we were all fed in grade school.
resp 23: Ok, we'll move past the overseas thing and the promotions od unmarried - childless women. Even when it comes to responsibilities within a team, women seem to be given more of the clerical work, and men the technical stuff, irrespective of abilities. And what are you saying is the root of the problem? Seems to me that the root is the womans' marrying or bearing a child. Do you suggest we get our tubes tied just so we can be given an equal chance at the work-place? That we maybe not get married at all? That we sign a contract stating that we will never move out of the city? Or are you stating that if more women quit jobs for reasons other than family related, like say better pay, companies will recognise her efforts better? I highly doubt that. The situation rises more from the "Boys club" concept than family responsibilities. Men tend to be very closed in their cliques. They want th freedom to swear, and smoke without being hampered by a woman's presence. A lot of advancement does come out of the boys-network than out of ability.
Once, a Sikh truck driver motioned me "Go on ahead, I'm not going to run you over."
Re 13: Point 1 - YUou may be right, there, Joe. Re Point 2: Fair comment. however, the first Englishmen to live there left because they wer/felt discriminated against, and Anerica presented a "Land of Opprtunity".
Re 24: Ok, so who did? Or, do you mean that the American Natives "discovered" it first? If so, fair comment. Chris Columbus would then be the 1st modern European to discover it.
This response has been erased.
Somehow I find that hard to believe. A lot of the Hindu and Sikh traditions overlap. We share many of the same festivals. Hindus are more affiliated with the Sikhs than with any other religion in India (except maybe Jainism). The only reason I can think of is their need for a separate country, and the assassination of Indira Gandhi and related events. I know that at that time there were a lot of Sikh murders and riots and a lot of Sikhs did end up leaving. But I'm pretty sure that that kind of discrimination isn't prevalent now. (We seem to have most of our religious conflicts between the Hindus and the Muslims :P)
re28: he still wasn't the first. he got lost and *discovered* some islands in the carribean, amerigo vespucci never made it across the water at all, iirc.
This response has been erased.
"...and lo, they unfurled their turbans and sailed forth using them as sails, and their wives made a nice curry from the potatoes of the new world...where they also found canadian trucks to drive." book of bruse ch7 v3
This response has been erased.
the one sikh that i got to know well was looking forward to returning to india after retirement...and he did.
I guess it's perspective in the end. I think I'm discriminated against in India on the basis of my sex, and other women may not feel that way. I guess it's the same with the Sikhs.
he didn't seem to worried about it.
This response has been erased.
<burns hole in tod's shirt> Like this?
:)
This response has been erased.
Sorry guys!! I am late for the party!! Ok, where do I begin?? As Dan was mentioning in some other thread, we screwed up big time on Kashmir. Ofcourse, our friendly neighbour helped us a lot in creating that mess but we are the primary owners. Then the wicked and evil ruling party, the BJP, divided the country on religious grounds on the temple issue. The nation saw worst communal riots since the partition. Ofcourse, corruption runs high and seems to only increase. Then we created a mess called the LTTE. Initially, the Indian RAW (Research and Analysis Wing) aided and armed the militants. Later we sent in a Peace keeping force to fight the LTTE. They got ambushed badly and had to be withdrawn. Why did we ever got involved in SriLanka's political affairs??? Really bad idea. In Punjab, Indira Gandhi was playing partisan politics and encouraged the party that wanted free khalistan. The way the Taleban has returned to haunt the US, the same way those parties turned militants haunted Indira Gandhi. But since there was no mass support for the movement the police were able to crush the miilitants (with some heavy-handed methods, I admit). I read somewhere that Sikhs are discriminated against in India. Anyone who's lived in India and moved around will vouch that thats utter crap. Are Muslims discriminated against?? To an extent, yes. Are backward classes discriminated against? To a great extent, Yes. Are sikhs discriminated against?? NOOO!!! Why do Sikhs leave India in such large numbers and inhabit UK and Canada? Sole reason - Money. Plus Sikhs are a very enterprising community (along with Gujratis). They are hardworking and enterprising. In India, trucks don't have hydraulic steering so you need a good physique for driving them. North Indians (Punjabis/Sikhs) have a better built that their fellow countrymen. And traditionally, Sikhs have owned large trucking fleets (just the same way as Patels own loads of motels in the US).
Thanks Sidhharth. Couldn't have said it better myself. There you have it folks. That's our perception of the whole Sikh-discrimination argument
They wouldn't lie to me! I am a customs officer!
Yeah.
Bruuu - I am oppressed in the nation of my birth!! Could you grant me political asylum in the US of A??? I am sooooooo oppressed and I swear I am not lying either. :P
This response has been erased.
"the women, i want to buy your women!"
Another moral failing, we sell anyone and everyone. Please post full credit card details - Name, CC number, that three digit code on the back of your CC, expiry date and your billing address. Allow 3-4 weeks for delivery. ;-)
"India's moral and political failings" don't sound any worse than the USA's. Nothing to write home about. More urgent would be India's culinary failings. Indian food is like Italian food gone horribly, horribly wrong. It's like somebody lost the cookbook before they got to the part about how much of which spices and herbs to use, or before they found out that cauliflower is supposed to be an *ingredient* in the dish, not the dish itself. Somebody should rescue those people.
I've never seen a cauliflower dish for Indian food. It has always come on ceramic dishes when I have ordered it.
You have several choices: